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

The previous Newsletter had rather a Country area flavour with reports of the LCBS50 event, so as the green buses tend to be overlooked, I thought we might stick with that. Anyway, only green buses are REAL London buses.... In this photo by Paul van der Hulks, RT 1700 and MB 90 are seen at Harlow participating in the event in what might be asymbolic shot as the RT, with interior lights on, could be going out on service to cover the failure of an MB, something that was not unknown 50 years ago. Of course, this is no reflection at all on MB 90 and its enthusiastic owner as this bus, the sole surviving Country Merlin, is in excellent shape. As I have mentioned in the past, I rather liked the low driving position, fully-seated Merlins and it so happens that MB 90 was the very first I ever saw when it was being used for driver familiarisation at HH long before I ever worked on the buses. Its survival is remarkable and it is always good to feature it in the Newsletter, even if it is not quite “of the fifties.”

Newsletter 165 May 2020

Opening Lines

As I start this edition in the middle of April, everything is still not happening because of the evil virus. We in Wigan appear to be fortunate in comparison to many places because there are few cases in relation to the size of the population although it is anyone's guess if this situation will continue. The spell of good weather we have had has allowed me to catch up with jobs at home and in the garden but RT 1018, incarcerated at St Helens, has had very little done to her. This is very annoying since, as far as the body restoration is concerned, the end is in sight and I really would like to complete a task which for many reasons has taken infinitely longer than I first anticipated. I am sure there are plenty of other vehicles also suffering unwanted delays and all we can do is wait and see how things pan out. My own feeling is that there is scope for sensible arrangements to allow people to get on with their lives but not everyone is sensible and of course some of the “authorities” are really enjoying this almost unprecedented increase in their powers. When you hear of people's shopping bags being inspected for “non-essential items” you have to wonder if we are now finding employment for many ex-Stasi

1

members and it is interesting that the government has had to announce formally that you can buy anything you like in any shops that are open and you can make free and unfettered use of your own garden. How kind. I hope that all the “Friends” and readers from the London Bus Museum are coping withthe restrictions and are in good health and spirits. As I write this at least one French narrow-gauge railway is advertising a re-opening at the end of the month and one or two German ones are working now (although not the splendid Harz system, alas). Whether operations do resume generally we shall have to wait and see, but if they do, then perhaps the UK will not be far behind.

LCBS50 Nick AgnewAs one of the EOR volunteers team involved with the 50th Anniversary of London Country event it was good to see the photo of RMC 1507/RF 180 on the front page. I can confirm that the ‘missing’ radiator filler cap on RF 180 was indeed intentional, to remind ‘those of us of a certain age’ that during the early days of London Country the Company sometimes fell short of the presentation standards set by their predecessor!

Can I add our sincere thanks to all who contributed to make the event such a success, including the owners of visiting vehicles without which the event would have been to poorer? Some owners and visitors had travelled a considerable distance to take part and their collective support was greatly appreciated. Even the weather improved from the threatening clouds and rain earlier in the day and it is hoped that everyone enjoyed the event as much as we did.

London Country Bus Services 50 years ago Geoff Hudspith In the caption to the picture of RF 180 and RMC 1507 on page 1 of Newsletter 164 you make the comment that ‘fifty years ago it was a case of using whatever was actually in running order to cover the schedules’ and ‘the RF lacks the radiator filler flap ..... not entirely unknown in those days’.

Actually, 50 years ago it wasn’t like that at all. I joined London Country in June 1970 and at that time thefleet was in more or less exactly the same condition as it had been in June 1969 when it was owned by London Transport. The only difference was that the legal lettering had been changed and the fleetname on most (but not all) of the buses had been changed to London Country. The words London Transport had been painted out on the front of the bus RFs, but the LT roundel hadn’t. The radiator badges of most RTs had been overpainted green. Otherwise everything was the same. We were even taken on a training bus to Chiswick to collect our uniforms and equipment.

In fact for a while after the split the fleet improved. The Green Line RFs had light overhauls at Aldenham (I don’t think that the bodies were removed and they certainly didn’t change identities) but they came back to the garages spick and span inside and out, and I believe the RMCs had the same treatment too. A small number of RTs were also overhauled at Aldenham and I drove one of these, RT 3478, within a day or two of it arriving freshly overhauled at Luton. I was slightly disappointed to find that although it looked very pretty everything was very ‘tight’ and it didn’t drive anywhere near as nicelyas most of our others, which were well worn in.

And then there were the new vehicles. Shortly after I joined the SMs began to be delivered; ordered, of course, by London Transport. In 1972 there was a big influx in the shape of the RPs for the Green Line routes still crew operated and the ANs to replace RTs on several trunk routes including Luton’s share ofthe 321. There were also small batches of other types such as the SMAs.

It was also the normal practice during the London Transport period and for the first few years of London Country for Green Line coaches to operate journeys on bus routes in the morning peak before taking up Green Line work. At Luton the Green Line RF allocated to LS53 did 2 or 3 journeys on the 360 with a driver and conductor (on overtime!) before operating the 09.09 route 714 to Dorking with only a driver. Many years before that in London Transport days when the 714 was still crew operated it was LS56 that did the early morning 360 journeys.

Unfortunately London Country’s early promise didn’t continue. The problems with a lack of spare parts and vehicle reliability originated with the wider industrial unrest in the country and the 3 day week. LCBS was reliant on London Transport for spares for RMs, RTs and RFs and LT itself was in a mess from

2

1973 onwards with vehicle shortages, unkempt vehicles, cuts to services and all the rest. But for a little while, early on, LCBS was not bad at all!

[Editorial comments: I was not working on the buses back then so I saw everything simply as an enthusiast observer. I remember the very rapid phasing out of “London Transport” on the vehicles, but I had not appreciated how quickly the new livery had been applied. Years ago one of our Bus Mechanics atSA, Jack Spokes, introduced me to a friend of his who lived in Apsley and had taken quite a lot of cine film in the early days of London Country. Certainly the buses were well-kept, and it was noticeable howquickly the canary yellow relief and lettering superseded the traditional Chiswick cream and gold with almost every vehicle on his films being in the new colours, although momentum was lost and I remember that in 1977, by which time I was part of the massive LCBS disorganisation, there was still oneRML, 2437 from Garston, which retained Chiswick cream. This worked the 347 and so sometimes slept at HH so I was able to photograph it, and it did attract visiting enthusiasts who had the same idea. We had reasonable supplies of items for the RT and RF vehicles, the problem arose with the Routemasters because LT apparently had an arrangement whereby they had first call and indeed second, third and subsequent calls, and didn't want to let us have anything at all for them so we struggled to keep them on the road. I did the last-ever RML engine change at HH (RML 2422 from GR which failed at Hemel Bus Station) and waited weeks for a special bolt before I could complete the task – very frustrating.

The use of Aldenham for overhauls became prohibitively expensive, but some fool in Reigate had the bright idea of setting up our own works just outside Gatwick Airport, a moronic decision because anyone who was capable and qualified went to work in the aircraft industry where things were clean, parts had to be available (you can't make do and mend with an aircraft) and wages were better, so, sad to say, our Works tended to be staffed by persons of less ability than one might like. Full employment during the 1970s (remember full employment...?) meant that driving and repairing buses was not seen as being worthwhile and as with the Works, so with the garages – staff were not necessarily of the quality one might have wished for. Couple this with the nationwide parts shortage Geoff mentioned and the influx of a lot of new and unreliable types and it was not surprising that standards fell. I really must write my memoirs one day. Looking back, I remember there were times when it was a wonder we had anything on the road at all.]

Ticket Machines Peter GommWith reference to Peter Larkham's piece about the above, I too met George Sawyer but at Willesden when BEL moved into a vacated Marks & Spencers warehouse there. At the time I had had a mishap with a Setright machine, having undone some screws and bits had gone boing and escaped. It wasn't mine so itwas all the more embarrassing. Having explained my predicament he volunteered to have a look at it. It was at the time that BEL were stripping RT 1 down ready for it to be moved to Northampton for repainting so we were making regular trips to Willesden. I duly delivered the machine and left it with George. A few weeks later I got message to collect it, repaired. So, like Peter I have pleasant memories of the gentleman, he saved my bacon.

Prototype RM Registration numbers John WagstaffRegarding “RT 4826 and the ABC’s” (page 21), I can confirm that there were spare OLD registrations whichhad been reserved after completion of the RTs in 1954 and that one of these numbers was certainly going to be given to RM 1 (which had of course been originally presented with the fictitious number LTE 1954). As Peter Gomm rightly suggests, however, it suddenly occurred to the higher echelons in LT that an OLD registration was not exactly in keeping with the new image that was wanted for “London’s bus of the future”. It must have been with some degree of panic that, shortly before the vehicle first entered public service in February 1956, the almost equally incongruous SLT 56 was awarded (and, as we all know, SLT 57/58/59 were kept back for the three subsequent prototypes). An SLT block had been allocated for new CDS service vehicles (mainly Austin LD-series vans) and, if I recall correctly, some newcars for the central pool (available for senior managers to self-drive and/or use by LT chauffeurs).

3

Unitrans Update Michael DryhurstRT3123 - Cummins B-series/Allison MT640 - is in the shop at Davis for a thorough and lengthy rebuild ofits Saunders body, which now is at least 70+ years old, presuming it isn't one of the 50 SEAS RT3/3 bodies built in 1950. Photo by Wally Mellor.

RTL 180

There is reference in the Minutes of the CME for 21st April 1960 to RTL 180 being damaged and possibly itbeing uneconomical to repair the damage. Being stuck at home with only my thumbs to twiddle (I wish...)I decided to have a look at John Hambley's book on the RTL and RTW classes, to find that RTL 180 was sold to the Ceylon Transport Board in 1968. Clearly there was a story here so donning my deerstalker

4

and lighting my pipe I decided to investigate. What I actually did was mention this to Tony Beard who responded as follows:

“The Minute actually records that a decision on the future of the vehicle had yet to be made. According the Ian's Bus Stop, this is the vehicle's history:

RTL 180 KGK 844 3/49 Leyland Titan, Leyland O.600, Park Royal body 4588, 7RT8 3/49 SP into service on 132, 161 (& 21, 51) (Sidcup) 50-52 SP 4/53 SP to overhaul 5/53 S from o/h (Shepherds Bush), still body 4588 54-55 S 9/56 S to Aldenham overhaul 9/56 Q from o/h (Camberwell), body 4440, 7RT3/1 57-59 Q 3/60 Q into store 4/60 Q to Aldenham overhaul 4/60 BW from o/h (Bow), Weymann body 7732, 7RT8/2 61-63 BW 5/64 BW to Aldenham overhaul 5/64 SW from o/h (Stockwell), Weymann body 5115, 7RT8 1965 SW 6/66 CT transfer (Clapton) 9/67 CT into store 1/68 AW change store (Abbey Wood) 8/68 bought for Ceylon Transport Board 23sri3284 exported to Ceylon

which would tend to show that after a short period in Camberwell (3/60) which I presume is post accident, the bus received a full overhaul and (as was the norm) received a replacement body. “

5

Previous page and above: Michael Wickham supplied these photographs and writes: ”I attach a couple of images which you might find of future interest. The originals are glass negatives, photographer unknown,probably a news agency, and they come with a typewritten caption:

LONDON TRANSPORT HIRE 350 LUXURY COACHES FOR USE AS 'BUSES TO CUT QUEUE WAITING - AID PUBLIC AFTER ABOLITION OF BASIC PETROL RATION.

6

To cut waiting times in queues - and to assist the public following the abolition the abolition of the basic petrol allowance, the London Passenger Transport Board has hired 350 luxury coaches from 100 private owners to augment the services on Central omnibus routes.

The coaches are to be brought into service on 27th October [1947] and will operate on existing routes at the same fares as ordinary 'buses and each one will bear in large letters on the front and sides "L.P.T.B. Relief".

The need to hire the coaches has arisen because new 'buses and spare parts have been held up through national supply difficulties.

The photos show a line-up of Maudslay Marathons of A & W Coaches and they bear names like Lady Louise and Lady Patricia. They appear to be new. At the back are LT 21 and Tilling ST 92; and placing the route notices on the luxury relief coaches at Chiswick, London, 15th October, 1947. “

[The A & W Omnibus Company was based in North Harrow. According to the ever-useful PSV Circle, they bought no fewer than 15 Maudslay Marathon III coaches with Whitson bodies over a period from Spring 1947 to March 1950. The records of names and fleet numbers are contradictory, but OMT 411, No 19, “Lady Louise” was a 33-seater new in June 1947 and had chassis number 70014, while the other easily identifiable coach is SMF 338, another 33-seater with Whitson body number 5113 new in September 1947 thus beating your editor into existence by a few days. It was fleet number 33, “Lady Mary” and in 1959 it was rebodied with a Plaxton Consort full-fronted body for Parker, Doncaster. Its chassis number was 70062. “Lady Patricia” which can be identified in the line-up (second coach from the left) was OMT 410, fleet number 17, new in May 1947 and was also a 33-seater with chassis number 70029. Next to it stands “Lady Margaret”, OMT 412, Maudslay 70016, number 20 new in June 1947, then “Lady Dora”, OMT 409, Maudslay 70020, number 18 dating from May 1947. All were 33-seaters. The coach nearest the camera in the line-up is SMF 338. A & W originated as a London independent in 1922, sold its bus services to the LGOC in 1930 and continued to operate coaches and removal vans. A receiver was appointed in 1951 so finances must have gone awry and the firm was removed from the register in 1959. - Ed]

Above: Continental Pioneer LLU 829 on the Brighton Run in 1969 or 1970 – note the splendid array of British-built vehicles it is delaying. Photo from David Thrower's collection.

7

Above: A talking point, perhaps – this notice, also photographed by David Thrower, was found pasted inside the lid of an LT Bell Punch ticket machine box. It is interesting to note the detailed instructions tostaff for the use of the public telephone system; once upon a time most private citizens were not “on the phone” so would not be familiar with its use. How things change as we now see a generation permanently welded to their “smart” phones to the detriment of those into whom they crash as they ignore reality in favour of the virtual world.

“ Ghost” buses John A Gray Apropos Opening Lines in Newsletter 162 (February), I too have sometimes wondered where some old familiar buses may now be. Of those I’ve driven in preservation, or have been associated with in some way, include: RT 2083/4, RT 3028, RTL 672, RFs 4, 12, 13, 36, 308, 633, 636, 652; GS 17.

I’ve noticed RF 636 mentioned recently; any ideas about the others, anyone?

[Editor's note: I had a look at the PSV Circle's Preserved Buses publication and found the following: Of the buses listed, RT 2083 or 4 is around and a year or two ago its owner, David Wilkinson of Billericay, sent a pic of it, which we published, having some body restoration, RF 4 is recorded with an owner in Headcorn, as is RF 12 (not necessarily the same owner...) RF 13 was featured in a recent Newsletter takingpart in the Amersham running day, RF 36 has disappeared from anyone's knowledge, having been one of the late Arthur Henderson's fleet, RF 308 used to be Peter Gomm's so he will know what happened to it, 633 is with Country Bus Rallies at Epsom, 636 London Vintage Bus Hire, Northfleet and 652 was sadly broken for parts and the remains scrapped in the 1990s. GS 17 was sold by Paul Fleet to someone named Dobbing at a place called Stibbington which seems to be in Cambridgeshire, where according to the PSV Circle it is once more a PSV. RTL 672 is with Roger Wright/London Vintage Bus Hire, too. RT 3028 is said to be with “The Old London Bus”, Hawkhurst. Some of these vehicles are owned by “Friends” so feel free to update us on their current condition. As for RF 308.......................]

8

Above: Keith Valla's photo of RF 308 inside Harlow Garage at the LCBS50 event earlier this year.

Above and next page: Bob Martin writes “Three 2RT2 which we haven't seen much of - RT 129 at Botleys Park Hospital, Chertsey (next page, lower)and RTs 56 (above) and 131 (next page, top) at Royal Earlswood Hospital, Redhill seen on the same day in late 1962. All three hospitals were for the mentally handicapped (not what they called them in those days) used for play buses and to help patients with therapy climbing stairs.

9

Now and Early postwar – any similarity? John A Gray A new word has entered the English vocabulary: “lockdown”. So our household, wife Sandy and me, are restricted to living within our domestic curtilage of house and small garden during the present coronavirus pandemic, like very many others.

10

Today, Tuesday 14th April, day after Easter Monday, cool but sunny enough to sit in the garden and reminisce on, let’s say, the equivalent day in 1946. Aged 3/4, I would be on my last day of Easter holidays at infants’ school, so it would be a special treat of a day out. Where to? (We lived in west London – Hanwell.) Chessington Zoo? – Not fully re-opened yet, we suspected. “Let’s go beyond it, to Leatherhead, then”, said I. My parents had almost certainly guessed my reason for this – bus rides! So we took the 211 (11T11, “Converted T” – Hanwell garage, HW) from our nearby top-of-the-hill stop, Studland Road, to Ealing Broadway Stations/Haven Green to change there to the 65. I was hoping for an ST – my preferred choice – but I think it may have been a 1STL1, the General petrol-engined square sort, another favourite, but whose seats were a bit low down for a little fellow to see out of the windows comfortably. Turnham Green (V) supplied both types to run the route.

Yippee! – Front upstairs seats seen to be free on bus approaching. “Wait!” – in no uncertain terms. “Thereare others queueing in front of us.” We – I – managed it. Though one front had been taken, the other seatwas free for me, parents sitting behind. By about Popes Lane stop at Little Ealing cross roads, the conductor had appeared with his long – probably a “Sevener” if not, even a rare “Niner” - ticket rack. “Two and a half to Leatherhead please.” “Whereabouts – town or bus garage?” “All the way, please.” “Half-a-crown, guv”, - conductor. Dad coughed, then coughed up. Two purple 1/- and one ochre 6d tickets were duly punched in the Leatherhead LT Gar section and handed over . . . Joy!

Onwards, left into Brentford High Street, past endless gasworks whose production odours penetrated atmosphere, clothing, everything. Then right, over Kew Bridge (Thames) and cleaner air, the long, high brick wall on the right enclosing Kew’s Royal Botanic Garden providing suitable enhancement to our bus backfiring gently when accelerator pedal eased. Narrow Richmond saw several exchanges of passengers, though the 65 didn’t routinely call in at the bus station. Down Star & Garter hill (said to be the home of British Legion and where retired military personnel made the 11th November Remembrance poppies), through twisty narrow Petersham, across Ham Common and into Kingston, to a southbound stop just beyond the bus garage (K) on our left. Standing looking out of the cavernous interior would’ve been Scooter LTs, General 1T1 square-cab Ts and Tilling wide-indicator Ts on the 213 to Sutton and Belmont, 215, 218 and 219 to points south west and west. We were now in Diddler trolleybus territory, even if only the first of two brief stretches of road shared with them. Our 65 then left the stop to go around Fairfield, seemingly getting bewildered in the absence of a direct road to Surbiton station, the next objective. After that we resumed our generally southward trajectory, over Southborough’s shallow hill and into Hook. Seen as a suburb of Kingston, Hook I seem to recall, had no fewer than three short-working terminals for the 65. Ace of Spades was atthe Kingston by-pass crossing; what were the other two? Then to Chessington, where just past the original Ordnance Survey establishment – where about seven years later I was to try to get an apprenticeship – came the popular Zoo on the right (later to be known as World of Adventures and currently featured on TV newsreels as an empty car park accommodating multiple coronavirus testing booths: whoever would’ve dreamt that in 1946?) To our left is the embankment for the never-completed Southern electric line extension beyond “temporary” Chessington South terminus to Leatherhead. Our bus plodded straight on, driver seated in his half-cab without door. No tram displayed there then – No. 1874 came later on closure in 1952 of London’s system. Thankfully it’s still around – at Carlton Colville Museum. Then through Ashtead woods after Malden Rushett cross roads, up Telegraph Hill – perhaps radiator coming on to the boil by now – joining left the Oxshott Road and over the railway bridge into civilized

11

Leatherhead town. Lovely! Anyone for luncheon? - Don’t get too excited: with most foodstuffs still rationed, few cafes were available. Bit like now, when coronavirus means none is allowed to be open . . .

Above: As promised last edition, here is another view of Cyril Theobald's home-made and RT-inspired standard lamp. You have to admire his ingenuity!

From the Archives – material supplied by Tony BeardAs a child of the fifties, I soon became aware of the increasing use of plastics in manufacturing. I recall my parents still referred to anything produced for the home use as being made of Bakelite, but then along came polythene and with it a sudden influx of red buckets in the hardware shops to replace galvanised and white pails. Cheap imported toys in plastic were embossed with Empire Made, or Made inHong Kong or Made in Japan and such was their quality, they did not last too long in the toy box. I recallmy first Airfix kit, a Spitfire, its construction being so basic that half of the pilot’s upper body was moulded into each side of the fuselage. This reminds me of a project during the last war to build a full size “plastic” Spitfire by a company based near Duxford for which a polymer-based material called Aerolite used; a prototype was built but never flown.

I mention the above as some of the following Minutes contain references to plastics in various forms which were then being considered for use to replace some bus components.

From the Minutes of the Rolling Stock Technical Committee Meeting held on 9 May 1960

Failure of RT Air Pressure PipesMr Smith referred to Experiment S8208 under which a section of the pipe feeding the air pressure signal,which is subject to frequent facture, has been replaced by nylon on a small number of RT3 buses. He quoted a memorandum from Mr Purves to Mr Higgins which stated that the Rolling Stock Executive had requested that authority be given to the extension of this experiment to a total of 1,000 vehicles.

12

It was not considered practicable to operate the experimental label system to so large a total as 1,000 vehicles. In the course of discussion it appeared that the trouble occurred on the vehicles fitted with Westinghouse air equipment. It was therefore recommended that an Advice be issued to cover the fitment of a nylon pipe to all RT3 vehicles fitted with Westinghouse equipment.

Since the meeting the Chairman’s attention has been drawn to the CME’s ruling, limiting the fitment of nylon tubing to a thousand vehicles at the first stage. Further discussion would therefore take place at afuture meeting.

Alteration AdviceSubject: Fitment of Ashtrays Reason for Alteration: To conform to policy of fitting ash trays on coachesCode affected: RF2/3

The above type vehicles are to have ash trays fitted to the nearside partition and to the backs of all crosswise seats with the exception of No 7 nearside and No 6 offside seats as shown on the revised drawings. Twenty five vehicles are affected.

Mr Butler reported that RF 305, fitted with ashtrays, has been operating over three weeks without adverse comment and there appeared to be no reason why arrangements should not be made to have the remaining 24 coaches fitted with ashtrays at overhaul.

Action: Full application at overhaul

Items Arising from the Drawing Office and Specification SectionsFront Hub MonogramsCodes affected: RM(85 vehicles)

Early production RM vehicles (total 85) were supplied with front wheel hub monograms omitted.A quantity of 170 monograms has now been supplied by AEC for these vehicles and they are to be madeavailable to the Rolling Stock Department for issue to the garages concerned.

Action: Full application at garages.

Replacement of Rear ReflectorsCodes affected: all PSV except RM

A recent advice is to be revised to indicate that the reflector discs only will be changed and not the complete assembly

Bottom Corner Panel – Nearside BulkheadCodes affected: RF1/2, RF1/3, RF2, RF2/1, RF2/3, RF5, RF5/1, RF5/2, and RF 5/3

Due to variations in the contour of the body at the nearside bottom corner of the front bulkhead, exterior panel, Part No 175.E13 has always been manufactured by MCW with 1/2 in cutting allowance on the front edge. To enable production at Aldenham to follow this procedure, the drawing is to be revised to show the cutting allowance

Action: Procedure for Maintenance

Width of Moulding at Entrance to Saloon IncreasedCodes affected: RF1/2, RF1/3, RF2/1, and RF2/3

Floor moulding, Part No RF033.B10, at the entrance to the saloon is to be superseded by a wider moulding to improve screw attachment to floor boards.The existing stock is to be used up and no further orders placed. Future replacements are to be of the wider moulding under a new part number

Action: Stock Advice

13

Revised Method of Fixing Timber Furring to Coving Panel Rail Nearside and Offside Codes affected: RF1/2, RF1/3, RF2, RF2/1, RF2/3, RF5, RF5/1, RF5/2, and RF5/3

The present method of fixing timber furring to coving panel rail nearside and offside is by means of bolts passing vertically through the timber and bottom horizontal flange of “Z” section rail. Flexing of the coving panels causes movement between timber and rail thereby shearing fixing bolts. To overcome this failure, bolts are to be passed horizontally through the timber furring and vertical wall of “Z” section as shown on the revised drawings

Action: Full application at overhaul

Change of Material of Rivets for Fixing Stress PanelsCodes affected: RF1/2, RF1/3, RF2, RF2/1, RF2/3, RF5, RF5/1, RF5/2 and RF5/3

Drawings, supplied by MCW, show all stress panels solid riveted to steel members by steel rivets. Whenriveting is carried out, damage is caused to the panel by the rivet. To overcome this difficulty, steel rivets are to be superseded by aluminium rivets as and when rivets are replaced and for all new manufacture of stress panel sub-assemblies.

Action: Procedure for maintenance.

Bottom Valance Rail in Two PiecesCodes affected: RT3, RT3/1, RT8, RT8/1, RT8/2 and RT10

To facilitate maintenance, the bottom valance rails are to be fitted in two pieces in lieu of one, the joint being at the centre line of the stump pillar, No 1 nearside and No 2 offside. Two piece rails will be known under new part numbers and existing stocks are to be converted to the new condition.

Action: Procedure for maintenance

Introduction of Ply in lieu of Elm for Staircase TreadsCodes affected: RT3, RT3/1, RT3/3, RT8, RT8/1, RT8/2 and RT10

Full Application

Existing elm treads covered with treadplate or Adamite, complete with timber bar packings, are to have revised covering treadplate assemblies and nosings fitted in staircase sets. Flanged kicking panels are to be replaced by panels without flange.

As and When Application

As and when it is found necessary, elm tread boards are to be replaced by ply tread assemblies (complete with treadplate covering) together with support angles and treadplate nosings.

Gearbox/Compressor/Brake Pump Drive.Codes affected: RM (20 vehicles)

Twenty early delivery RM vehicles are equipped with a three in V belt drive for the ⅜compressor/gearbox/brake pump whereas the standard drive is now a two 1/2 in V belt arrangement in this application.

The 3-belt drive is to be maintained only until such time as the gearbox is undergoing unit overhaul when the 3-belt pulley will be remove and scrapped. It will be necessary for garages to replace the 3-belt pulleys with 2-belt pulleys on associated compressor and brake pump drive units, the displaced pulleys to be retained for use on the remaining 3-belt drives.

In the first instance, scrapping of any one pulley, due to damage prior to gearbox overhaul, will necessitate the fitting of the standard 2-belt arrangement complete to the vehicle concerned. Spares of 3-belt pulleys are no longer available but limited supplies of belts must be maintained

14

Action: Full application at unit overhaul to 20 vehicles.

Mounting Bracket Fixing Bolts on Nos 1, 2 and 3 Bars – ChangedCode affected: RT7

Difficulty is be encountered with loose mounting bracket bolts on Nos 1, 2 and 3 body bars due to nut bottoming on the thread. To obviate this, the following action is to be taken.

Garage Action

As and when the mounting bracket bolts are found to be loose on No 3 bar, access holes are to be cut in the offside and nearside positions above the bar. All existing bolts are to be replaced by shorter bolts in diameter x 1 in long fitted in the reverse direction, i.e. with the nuts ⅜ ⅛between the back to back channels. It will be necessary to remove the two floor battens and modify them before refitting to facilitate future removal of the bolts.

Works Action

All existing mounting bracket fixing bolts on Nos 1,2 and 3 bars are to be changed to shorter bolts in diameter x 1 in long and fitted in the reverse direction⅜ ⅛

Action: Full application at overhaul and material to be made available for garages

Beatonson “Rapide” Window Guard Rail Replaced by Standard HSC Type

Recent advices are amended to delete the revised vehicle codes for the 25 vehicles concerned. Body numbers are to be listed in lieu and used with their existing codes to identify the vehicles equipped with non-standard windows

RF Rear Door Escutcheon Plate

Mr Tame stated that the CME had examined sample escutcheon plates at Aldenham and directed that future plates for coach application be painted green with “interior cream” edging and handle be painted red. Mr Tame then exhibited two painted sample plates for possible use on Central Area buses. One plate was completely painted in Chiswick Cream and the other with interior cream finish, both to be use with a red painted handle.

A lengthy discussion ensued and the following recommendations were made for further consideration by the CME:

1. RF Country Buses should have a green painted escutcheon plate with Chiswick Cream edging plus a red painted handle.

2. RF Central Buses should be equipped with escutcheon plates painted in Chiswick Cream all over plus a red painted handle.

3 For the sake of standardisation the escutcheon plates for an RF Coach should be painted in the same colour as Country Buses having Chiswick Cream edging in lieu of interior cream edging.

With regard to the method of introduction of the revised colour schemes it was agreed that would be implemented at vehicle overhaul only.

Rear Frame Nearside Pillar Interior Mouldings – RT

Mr Stone stated that an Alteration Advice would shortly be issued authorising the change from timber to Lamiplate on the rear frame mouldings, on a use up stock basis. Apart from the affected mouldings consumption of other mouldings was considered insignificant. The Chairman therefore did not advocate at this stage further introduction of Lamiplate. Reference was made to earlier discussion on the above

15

subject and the Chairman pointed out that it was not possible to weld Lamiplate material without damaging the PVC covering. Mr Styles stressed the point that this material was largely untried and thought that service experience should be gained before using the material on a wide basis.

The Chairman advised that the cost of producing Lamiplate mouldings was approximately half the cost of corresponding timber mouldings which were subject to almost 100% scrap after one life, therefore the use of Lamiplate was fully justified. He requested Mr Stone to determine the actual quantity of Lamiplate that is likely to be required over a given period also whether pattern and quantity requirement can in fact be obtain before issue of the Alteration Advice concerned.

Discussion then ensued on the feasibility of employing Lamiplate as exterior panels on coachbuilt roof sections which are currently being used to replace Jicwood section. It was considered inadvisable to use this material eternally because it was unpredictable for exterior application also mixing Lamiplate with painted panels was not desirable from an appearance aspect.

Mr Stone stated that no difficulty would be encountered in using 3ft wide Lamiplate for constructing roof sections the joints would run longitudinally and would be covered by strap plates. The Chairman then pointed out that alternative material i.e. Skinplate was only available in 1 metre x 2 metre sheets and therefore was of no interest to LT. It appeared to be slightly more expensive per square foot than Lamiplate.

Finally Mr Butler advised that the Rolling Stock Executive had expressed an opinion that consideration could well be given to leaving roof panels in an unpainted condition and in this circumstance it would bewell to leave the possible use for Lamiplate for roof application in abeyance pending a decision from the CME

Mr Stone referred to suggestion No 51998 which proposed that the centre section of the roof be left unpainted and advised that it had now been rejected on the ground of appearance and necessity of masking certain sections of the roof during paint spray. He also drew attention to the fact that if it weredesired to leave the dome-panels unpainted. This would necessitate cutting in the rear dome panel as was no moulding line available. Alternatively the latter panel could be left unpainted to waist line.

Paint Condition of Exterior of Vehicle Roofs

Mr Tame stated that a report on the above was now in circulation. Mr Butler added that certain aspects affected by local conditions were under investigation.

Driver’s Seat Covering

Mr Styles reported that issue of an experimental procedure sheet to cover test of Naugahyde was in hand.

RT Rear Platform Covering in Treadmaster Material

Mr Stone submitted schematic drawings of four alternative proposals for platform covering employing Treadmaster slats affixed to metal plates which could be screwed to the platform.

Discussion ensued and the Chairman agreed to provide cost estimates of two schemes which employed transverse Treadmaster slats square cut with alternative treadplate or Treadmaster edging with a common Treadmaster nosing.

Destination Blind, Tell-Tale Marking RF and GS Vehicles

Mr Butler referred to long-standing complaints from the driving staff at Hertford where OMO vehicles were garaged and pointed out that difficulty in reading the tell-tale blind markings is being encountered.he also pointed out that the foregoing markings were indistinct and urged that a satisfactory solution be obtained as soon as possible. Mr Stone advised the Committee that this matter was in hand at Aldenham and steps are being taken to establish whether it would be advisable to fit tabs on blinds similar to that adopted on RT vehicles, or alternatively use an intense black marking ink.

16

Subsequent to the meeting, Messrs Tame and Stone have jointly investigated the problem and propose to suggest to the next RSTC meeting that introduction of tabs for RF and GS destination blinds was nownecessary.

Underseat Saloon Heaters RT8/2

Mr Stone referred to a conversation regarding 28 County buses and stated that the CME and Operating Manager (Country Vehicles) were looking into the question of necessity of converting these vehicles to Green Line double-deck coaches, Code RT8/1, during fitment of heaters at overhaul. Mr Crawley drew attention to the fact that the large banjo employed in this heater system would not be available for a period of 5-6 months. Mr Stone then submitted an alternative scheme dispensing with this banjo fitting and introducing a stock in gas plug which could be modified for use with standard elbow hose ⅜connection.

It was agreed that the foregoing gas plug should be accepted in order to resolve this difficulty.

Fuel Filter Bracket RM

Mr Styles noted that the bracket design is being modified to include a stiffening web. He pointed out that a specimen failed bracket had been examined and it was found that material was not to specification, hence the possible reason for failure. He therefore queried the necessity for the modification.

Mr Smith stated that a number of brackets had failed and thought that the general design was poor and would be vastly strengthened by the provision of a gusset. Mr Higgins added that the laboratory had only examined one failed bracket and thought that the others might well be to correct material specification. He agreed to take up this matter with AEC at their next Joint Technical Meeting to be heldon 25 May 1960. The Chairman, in conclusion, thought it would be better to proceed with the present action authorising provision of a strengthening web on all brackets.

Plastic Tubing

Mr Smith stated that six traders had been interviewed during the last month on the possible use of thermoplastics in RM saloon heater systems. He advised that at the present time there appear to be no thermoplastics which are suitable as piping for hot water. The few materials which are claimed to be suitable such as Delvin, Polycarbonate and PTFE can be ruled out of this application at the present time on score of cost and/or non-availability in the form of 1in bore tubing. Nylon piping might be suitable but the various traders disagree on this with two actually condemning it because of its short life. Natural rubber is not a suitable alternative because of its weight and short life. Thermosetting plastics might be suitable although the cost is likely to be high.

Continuing he stated that the most promising line of development appears to be in protection of the aluminium components from corrosion by internal coatings such as:

(a) epoxy resin(b) Sakaphen process(c) nylon

If one of the processes can be proved satisfactory and also incorporated at an economic price consideration could be given to the use of copper piping which would last the lifetime of the vehicle. This line of action was generally thought to be the best in circumstances prevailing.

The Chairman enquired what the increase in vehicle weight is likely after lining of aluminium components in the water system. Mr Smith stated that as the coatings are quite thin (under 1/32in) the increase in weight would be negligible.

Finally the Chairman stated that at this stage, no decision could be arrived and that a review of the possible material alternatives for the water system on RM vehicles should be undertaken when further information is available on the coating process.

17

Inhibitor for RM Cooling System

Mr Stone stated that 24 vehicles fitted with untreated pipes under cover of Experiment S8241 had entered service at Stage 6 of the Trolleybus Conversion Programme and he queried whether the laboratory had made arrangements for the introduction of an inhibitor in the cooling systems. In reply Mr Styles stated that this matter was in hand and added that it would be necessary to replenish the inhibitor at the rate of half the specified initial quantity every three weeks The Chairman commented that it would appear that inhibitor application might prove expensive as such it might be an uneconomic proposition on a fleet basis.

Mr Stone queried when untreated pipes on the foregoing vehicles might be inspected for corrosion. In reply the Chairman stated that a proportion of vehicles should be inspected after 12 months service. TheChairman then advised that he had received a list of parts used for the RM cooling system, which are likely to be subject to heavy corrosion as asked for early guidance on standard corrosion protection required when reissued after overhaul. It was agreed this matter be given early attention.

Emergency Slip Plate

Mr Tame said that it would simplify production if the above plate could be manufactured from 18-gauge steel sheet instead of 20-gauge steel sheet necessitating folding of edges. He agreed to forward a batch of 18 gauge plate to Mr Butler for further investigation

Suggestions

Number Description Remarks53426 Electric truck charging area – method of entry Adopted award53484 Side blind gear – to stop disengagement of shaft No award53486 RF top step riser to be of thicker metal No award53575 RM air pressure test gear – release valve on gauge Omission award53578 Miscellaneous Fleet Vehicle 443W – Modification to driver’s step No award53627 Door facing No 10 outer door Aldenham to be modified No award53827 Bus roofs to be treated with shellac knotting No award53962 Destination blinds – destination to be shown by code numbers No award53920 RF- OMO - cash counter of metal or metal covered No award54019 Chiswick – Guard rail at Section Engineer’s office block No award54089 RF- OMO - change machine cover box be removed No award54094 Brake pedal stem bent to alter angle No award54124 RT – nearside driving mirror to be rectangular No award54132 Driver’s door cab entrance – rubber padding to top bar No award

From the Minutes of the Chief Mechanical Engineer (Road Services) Meeting No 289 held on Thursday 19 May 1960

Closure of Charlton and West Ham Works

The CME referred to a memorandum dated 10 May from the Chief Financial Officer seeking information regarding the earliest date at which it might be practicable formally to hand over Charlton Works to theEstate Agent and Rating Surveyor for disposal, in order that credit for the capital value could thence be levelled against London Transport’s contribution to the Commission’s Central Charges. It was suggested that the hand-over might be completed during 1960, although clearly there would be no point in incurring heavy expenditure to complete the removal of equipment if, by doing so, release of the premises could only be very slightly accelerated.

The general position was reviewed and referring to the CME’s memorandum dated 12 May 1950, Mr Wickssaid he would shortly offer a date at which Charlton Works could be made available for disposal.

18

Authority to Withdraw Redundant Assets

C16/192 Four Bedford 5-ton Lorries; Total Book Value £2,070Replaced by four 5-ton Ford Thames Traders to provide improved loading facilities and increased floor space.

This was approved for submission to the Executive.

Failures and Delays due to Mechanical DefectsRM Vehicles

(a) GeneralThe extent and nature of defects and failures of RM vehicles was reviewed with particular relation to week ended 3 May 1960 immediately following Stage 6 of the Trolleybus Conversion Scheme. The CME expressed the view that certain of the failures, other than those associated with Simms Electrical Equipment, were such as could reasonably have been found before the vehicles entered service.

(b) Electrical Failures

Consideration was given to the present stage of investigation into the causes of failures of Simms Electrical Equipment on RM vehicles following Stage 6 of the Trolleybus Conversion Scheme on 27 April 1960. Enquiries in this connection were continuing; failures have now been substantially reduced.

(c) Body Panels

Mr Wicks said that everything possible was being done to improve the availability of repaired RM body panels.

Bus Washing Machine – Uxbridge Garage

The CME noted that to replace the present Essex machine at Uxbridge by a Februat machine, it would be necessary to re-allocate six vehicles, in which event the scheduling costs involved might offset to an uneconomical extent the benefits to be derived from the replacement of the Essex machine.

RM Buses Deliveries

The delivery position of RM buses was noted as follows:

Vehicles Delivered W/e 21.5.60 Cumulative PositionPark Royal to AEC 8 351AEC to London Transport 6 332

Thefts from Ticket Boxes In Service

The CME referred to a meeting held by the Operating Manager (Central Road Services) on 20.4.60 with the Central Road Services Committee (T & GWU) in which it was recorded that the Committee had examined photographs of specimen devices which could be fitted to RM, RF and RT vehicles and would welcome their adoption.

Mr Purves said he had not yet received a request from the Operating Manager (Central Road Services) for estimates of the cost of fitment and Mr Wright was directed to pursue this matter.

Direction indicators – Guy Vehicles

Mr Wicks said that only 70 of the fleet of 84 Guy single-deck buses were required at present for servicepurposes and suggested that the fitment of flashing direction indicators be confined to the 70 vehicles. The CME directed that the Operating manager (Country Buses and Coaches) be asked to confirm that

19

the present service requirement would remain, in which event the 70 service vehicles only should be equipped with direction indicators.

Compass Panels

Reference was made to the increasing extent to which steel compass panels were receiving damage and after discussion the CME directed that a Standard Material Alteration Advice be issued whereby steel compass panels would be repaired as practicable in situ at garages and existing stock utilised on overhaul after which rubber compass panels would be adopted as standard.

RM Saloon Heater Radiator Blind

Mr Purves referred to the desirability of improving upon the existing material used for this blind and indicated the results of tests with alternative material the additional cost of which would be 6d per vehicle. The value of the unused stock of present material was estimated to amount to £100 of which the contractors had offered to buy back approximately half. After discussion the CME directed that to provide a comparison on a large scale this course be followed and that blinds be obtained in the new material without additional cost to the extent of the value of the present material to be resold to the contractor.

Public LettersCommunication upon the following subjects had received attention:

Name Comment ActionMrs F J Bradley Request for Lansdown Way doors to be

closed at night (Stockwell Garage)Doors must be used as exit but will be closed from 1.30am to 4.00am

P K Gerhold Lack of bamboo poles on trolleybuses Checks carried out from time to timebut often not replaced by crews.

As I mentioned in the April “Minutes”, I have access to minutes of a series of informal meetings which Bill Durrant held between 1955 and 1960, examples of which I will include from time to time. Here is onefrom 6 December 1955 at which meeting was also discussed the site for a new garage in Farnham Road, Slough and the inspection of RM1 by the Transport Users’ Consultative Committee (which was then scheduled for March 1956). And then there is this discussion which I wonder if any of our trolleybus historians have previously discovered:

Replacement of Trolleybuses

Mr Harbour stated that consideration had been given at the Executive Conference to a letter from the Town Clerk of the Metropolitan Borough of Islington requesting the Executive to reconsider their decision to replace trolleybuses by diesel engined buses. The letter stated that the Council had considered that the matter was regarded as serious from a health point of view.

Mr Harbour went on to say that the Executive had asked for a report to be submitted by Mr Durrant and Mr Wilford on certain aspects of the discharges from diesel-engined exhausts.

Following discussion, Mr Durrant undertook to prepare, in collaboration with Dr Norman and with Mr Wilford, a considered memorandum on the subject for ultimate consideration by the Executive.

There are a couple of points here. Durrant always preferred “oil” being used to describe the engines in question yet here we have an example of the more popular description being applied. And just for interest I will try to extract his report from the files held by the London Metropolitan Archives when next I am in Farringdon.

In addition to Bill Durrant, those mentioned above are B H Harbour (formerly Operating Manager, Country Buses and Coaches until 1954, and from then Board Member until 1963), Mr A T Wilford (Chief Scientific Officer) and Dr L G Norman (Chief Medical Officer). As Chief Chemist in 1937, Wilford had signed off on a report that considered the health of conductors due to the proliferation of exhaust fumes that circulated around the platform areas of buses operating in Central London. Within his report

20

he advocated that an offside window, which could be closed, was desirable in order to scavenge the platforms of buses by causing a through draught of air and it has always been my contention that, as RT 1’s body was in the design stages, this addition was included as I have never found a document that refers to the aperture as a “signalling window”.

[Had to smile at Tony's reference to his Airfix Spitfire; my first Airfix model was a Sopwith Camel, since I was a big fan of the Biggles stories from WWI, in which he flew them. When I reached 70 my daughter thought it would be amusing to buy me a couple of Airfix kits – she clearly realised that I am by now well into my second childhood – one of which was a Spitfire. It's true that it is to a larger scale than the original 1/72nd Airfix kits, but the amount of detail and consequently the huge number of tiny parts was amazing. The Camels used to take less than an hour to assemble but the new Spitfire took months. I am still doing a Lancaster bomber, which is to 1/72nd scale, but also has vastly more detail than was the case over 60 years ago. It is, of course, a useful time-filler for these days when it is rarely possible to go out anywhere. Many years ago, in the early 1970s or perhaps even the late 1960s, I wrote to Airfix and suggested that they might like to make some bus kits to complement their 00-scale rolling stock and lineside accessories. I even went so far as to suggest some types of bus that would find a wide use on railway layouts, regardless of region, but Airfix declined to take up the idea. Not that long afterwards came the proliferation of white-metal bus kits which proved very popular, even though they were much more expensive and more difficult to assemble than an Airfix one would probably have been. You could truly say that Airfix missed the bus with that one! - Ed]

Above: There is mention of the Guy Specials in the minutes above. Here is GS 76 photographed by Martyn Hunt at Marine Drive, Brighton on 4th May 1980, the occasion of the Historic Commercial Vehicle Club (or was it Society by then?) Brighton Run. What appears to be a Vulcan on the back of a Bedford TKarticulated lorry on trade plates (naughty!) is passing the GS and in the background is one of those new-fangled Routemaster things and a Barton Transport Duple-bodied Leyland PD1 double-decker. I have not been able to identify the Plaxton-bodied coach with “Kirby's Travel” but it is probably not Kirby's of Bushey Heath whose livery included a lot of blue with the red and cream. The GS is driven by its then owner Dickie Hall, who I think came from Dunstable, and worked for London Country at the time. The bus itself was last heard of in Belgium, where it is apparently for sale – we have illustrated it in its current white livery in an earlier edition of the Newsletter.

21

RLH 53 Alan DavidsonFor anyone following the story of this bus, the first Central Area RLH, there has been a happy conclusion. From the west coast of America to Liverpool docks and the London Bus Museum to High Wycombe, this bus, after several years of careful restoration has finally made it to the operational list on Ewen Pring’s excellent RLH Info Centre website. From the photo, exterior adverts have been added but I wonder if they have kept the original interior ones from 1971. The other two brought back from the U.S.A RLHs 69 and 71 are of course in Roger Wright’s care and with the anniversary of the withdrawal next April of the Central Area RLHs there could well be 3 extras hitting the streets of London.

Another anniversary this year is the 50 years , 31/7/1970, of the last London Country RLH’s at Addlestone with the photo of RLH 44 in Newsletter 164 advertising the fact that the last duty was a 461A from Walton.

[RLH 53 featured as the cover photo on the very first “Friends” Newsletter in July 2006. Of the three “American” RLHs, it was reputedly the one in the best mechanical condition, and it has my spare starter motor fitted because somewhere in the USA it had lost its own. I remember stripping, cleaning, lubricating and testing the motor in the yard at the rear of my house prior to its being shipped to America. Small world... - Ed]

Chadwell Heath George MoonRegarding David Wells's article on Chadwell Heath, he is indeed correct in thinking that a Johannesburg trolleybuses was re-imported for preservation into the UK. This is No. 589, built post-war by BUT on what was basically an AEC 664T chassis widened to 8' (the original vehicles had rear bogies designed for 7'6" wide bodywork) and bodywork built to Metro-Cammell design by their South African subsidiary, Bus Bodies (South Africa) Ltd. It has its own website and details are also included in the British Trolleybus Society's website. 589 is now resident at Sandtoft Trolleybus Museum near Doncaster.

Its story is however a little more complex. A visit to Johannesburg by two members of what became the London Trolleybus Preservation Society, Tony Belton and the late Don Jones (who had already enjoyed several holidays in the country) resulted in negotiations to preserve an SA3-type vehicle and 589 was donated on withdrawal by the Corporation to the LTPS. Shipping back to the UK was arranged but an insuperable hurdle arose because the South African Railways, who at that time enjoyed a monopoly of road haulage, quoted an excessive and quite unaffordable price to tow the vehicle from Johannesburg to Durban Docks for loading. As a result it passed to a local museum but eventually became rather neglected and unloved, which is where the 589 Preservation Group stepped in and was successful in organising its repatriation some ten years ago. The original but perhaps misguided LTPS ideawas to restore the vehicle in LT colours as an SA3 but I think wiser counsels would have prevailed in duecourse; there was also a proposal in the early days to restore Newcastle 628 as a Q1 but with four genuine London Trolleybuses now at the East Anglia Transport Museum, it looks far better in Newcastle livery, and of course 1768 was also on loan from the London Transport Museum for some nine years, being returned mainly because the seat upholstery and fillings were life expired and LTM for some reason refused their renewal as 'non-original' despite the offer of free new LTE pattern trolleybus moquette. In view of the almost complete reconstruction of the 'Scooter' LTL, the logic of this argumentescapes me to this day!

I hope this background may be of interest. I am a member of both the London Trolleybus Preservation Society and the East Anglia Transport Museum.

Pinewood Again Graham SmithIn Newsletter 164 Peter Larkham asked if I knew whether the buses serving Pinewood Studios worked as a 457D (from Windsor) to Pinewood, then 457C to Uxbridge, and reversing the process on the way back to Windsor. Rising to the challenge, I checked out the workings in the Uxbridge, Ruislip and District localarea timetable commencing 17th October 1956. A copy of the 457C and 457D page is attached. Also, the page reminds us of the 457 Express which ran in summer months. The 457D had two arrivals and four departures in the morning peak, thus suggesting there might not be a clear pattern of workings.

22

Further checking showed that five buses served Pinewood in the morning peak, with all five RTs arriving within a 12 minute slot between 7.48 and 8.00. What a fine sight that would have been!

The individual morning journeys were as follows, the numberings are mine, based not on running numbers which I don't know but on departure times from Windsor Garage:

Bus 1 - WR dep. 5.14 (Tues & Fri only) - 457D - P / dep. 5.50 - 457C - UX / dep. 6.13 - 457A - SL Stn / dep. 7.00 (M-F) - 457A - UX / then 3 rounders on 457C UX - P - UX dep. 7.33, arr. UX 9.20, then returning 'dead' to WR

Bus 2 - WR dep. 6.24 - 457 - UX / then 1 1/2 rounders dep. 7.08 on 457C - UX - P / dep. 8.02 - 457D - WR arr. 8.34

Bus 3 - WR dep. 6.57 - 457A - UX / then 1 1/2 rounders dep. 7.40 on 457C - UX - P / dep. 8.37 - 457D - WR arr. 9.09

Bus 4 - WR dep. 7.01 - 457A - UX / then 2 1/2 rounders dep. 7.45 on 457C - UX - P / dep. 9.25 - 457D - WRarr. 9.57

Bus 5 - WR dep. 7.19 - 457D - P / dep. 7.54 - 457D - SL Crown arr. 8.12

Key: P = Pinewood, SL = Slough, UX = Uxbridge LT Station, WR = Windsor Bus Station

So, buses 1 - 3 had similar schedules, working first through from Windsor to Uxbridge as 457/A, before returning direct to WR from Pinewood as 457Ds; bus 5 had just a 457D duty to/from Pinewood; and bus 1had the most complex schedule which, at three, included the most 457C rounders.

23

From my photographic records I see that I drove to Pinewood early on the morning of Friday, 28th January 1977, in my Rover 2000TC, a wonderful car. The purpose was to see the last morning working to Pinewood of what was now route 452, scheduled for RML operation but that was by no means a certainty, given the vehicle availability woes London Country was then experiencing. No RML but, in its place and a nice bonus for venturing out on such a dark and freezing cold morning, RT 1009 appeared with no passengers on board or any waiting to board. I can't immediately lay my hands on the shots I took but they were horribly dark. Nor can I find the area timetable from which I discovered the times for the Pinewood journey. [Note to self - more tasks during Lockdown!]

My notes show that on that same day route 309 (Chorleywood - Rickmansworth - Harefield) lost its Garston RF allocation, with Amersham's BLs taking over. Also, it was the last day of the small LCBS garage at Luton. I took various photographs after leaving Pinewood, in Slough, Langley, Harefield and Uxbridge, including RP 62 (WR78 pre-route 704/5 duty) and RMLs on the 452, RFs on the 458, RF 146 (GR1) on the 309, RT 1009 again but on the 335, and AN 105 (LS1) on the 321. The following day I went out and photographed RF 146 again, but now reallocated to WR and at Gerrards Cross on the first day of a shortened and temporarily subsidised route 335. Also, this was due to be the first day of route 458's conversion from RF to SM but, fortunately, RF 120 at least was seen.

I have no idea what, if any, bus service replaced the 457C and D back in 1977 but I googled 'Pinewood Studios bus service' and was surprised to see that Studio Shuttle Buses run from Slough, Uxbridge, Gerrards Cross and West Ruislip using 28-seaters on the Uxbridge run and 16-seaters on the others. Admission to the Shuttle Bus is 'upon presentation and swiping of an authorised pass, and these are available to Studio Employees, Productions, Tenants, Visitors and Authorised Local Community'. I have no idea and don't wish to know what vehicle types are used but I'm sure none could ever beat a ride on an RT, even in the depths of winter and without its heater working...

Watford, Leavesden Road (WT) Alan CrossVery interested to see the piece by Peter Larkham and seeing what has become of WT. Your recollectionof the garage is with Post Office vans in it. I remember WT the way it was from the enclosed photographs. As you can see, part of the garage could accommodate only singe-deckers – with the two warning “Danger Low Roof” signs, the large one over T 361 and the very small one high up between C 77 and the T. [If you can't spot it, it is hanging from the roof girders and is white on black background; I mention this because I couldn't see it for some time! - Ed]

Above: Leavesden Road, 17th December 1949 – STs 416 and 440, Q 89 and an STL. Photo by Alan B Cross.

24

Above: Another view of the garage taken on the same date with Q 89, STL 1632, STL 2679 and STL 1989 amongst others.

Below: C 77 and a fuelling point inside WT, 22nd July 1950.

Next page: The same date and T 361, lacking a blind, acts as a focus for the “Low Roof” signs inside the garage. As may be deduced from the Buckinghamshire registration, T 361 started its life with Amersham and District. It was a coach with a petrol engine but once London Transport got their hands on it, it gained an oil engine and this Weymann body from the former R 22. The bus was finally withdrawn in June 1953.

25

Above: Again on the same date in 1950, brand-new RLH 5 terminates close to the garage while working a 336. The bus was taken into stock on 22nd May that year and is unfortunately not one of the many survivors of the class. All photos by Alan B Cross.

The Two “last” RTs Graham SmithPeter Gomm is indeed correct (would we ever doubt him?) in saying that RM 1 might have had an OLD registration, continuing from the RT series, until LT realised this was inappropriate for a new bus. Ken Blacker's "Routemaster - Volume 1 1954-1969" book, one of his many splendid Capital Transport titles, states that OLD 862 was originally allocated but was never carried by RM 1. It was changed nominally to

26

SLT 42 before becoming SLT 56 on 5th December 1955. Similarly, RM 2 was originally OLD 863 and then, SLT 43 before becoming SLT57.

RT 4825 was the highest numbered RT, registered OLD 589 with body number 9050, and delivered to LT on 29th March 1954. It was the last Park Royal-bodied RT but not the last RT to be delivered. That honourfell to green RT 4794, the last Weymann-bodied example, delivered seven months later on 11th November 1954. RT 4794 was registered OLD 861 but RT 4793 was OLD 830, with OLD 831-860 being used for Weymann-bodied RTLs 1602-1631. A further severed link between RT 4794 and RM 1 arose with their body numbers. RT 4794’s was 9227, and 9228/9 were initially allocated to RM 1 and 2 before a new series for Routemasters was created, starting B1.

As was the usual practice with overhauling RT family vehicles at Aldenham, body and chassis were separated on arrival and were rarely reunited, with the registration and bonnet numbers being applied to whichever overhauled vehicle was ready next to re-enter service. Neither RT 4794 nor 4825 received any special treatment so their original bodies and chassis were “lost” during the overhaul process. Ian Smith's highly informative "Ian's Bus Stop" website shows that 4794 received three overhauls at Aldenham, emerging from the third one in March 1969 with a Park Royal body no. 8370, and painted red after some 14 years on Country Area duties. 4825, however, had four overhauls and, on its second visit to Aldenham, received a Saunders roof-box body, which was fairly unusual for high numbered RTs. Throughout its roof-box days from November 1961 to July 1965, RT 4825 was allocated to Southall (HW) garage, by then entirely 100% RT, and would have operated on routes 55, 92/A/B, 97, 105, 120, 211 and 232.

HW was unique among LT’s bus garages in having operated not only RT 4825, numerically the last RT, but, also, RT 4794, the last RT to be delivered. RT 4794 was at HW some ten years after RT 4825, from October 1975 to April 1978, by which time its only RT-operated route was the 105. During 4825's time at HW, the 105's route was from Shepherd's Bush to Hayes Station with a Mon-Fri peak hours extension to Hayes North, requiring 46 buses on Mon-Fri (HW - 27 RTs and S [Shepherd's Bush] - 19 RTLs), with a bus every 2-3 mins between Greenford and Park Royal in peak hours. By the mid-1970s the service, now fromthe Bush to Heathrow Airport, with a bifurcation to Havelock Estate in Southall, required just 21 buses (HW - 14 RTs and S - 7 RTs).

RT 4825 lost its Saunders body on its third visit to Aldenham in July 1965, replaced by Park Royal body no. 8477, a 3RT8/2, the same classification as its original body no. 9050. In October 1965 4825 was transferred to Shepherd’s Bush (S) garage and operated there until December 1970, so it would have run on the 105 again from time to time.

The 105 was unique in being the only route to serve Southall and Park Royal, both locations forever associated with constructing RTs and RMs, and it seems rather appropriate that both of the “last” RTs, 4794 and 4825, should have spent part of their lives on this route.

As many will know, RT 4825 is now in the London Transport Museum’s collection at Covent Garden. Whether by design or otherwise, it is equipped with blinds from HW although, when photographed a few years ago, its route 120 destination was combined with intermediates for route 92. Perhaps it should be showing blinds for the 105 in view of its service history and the route’s geographical significance?

RT 4825 survives but RT 4794 is no more. After route 105’s RTs were replaced by RMs on 30th April 1978, it was transferred to Plumstead (AM) garage, before making that one-way journey to Wombwell Diesels in South Yorkshire a few months later.

There’s a photograph of RT 4794 leaving HW on route 105 – p.62 of “London Transport Bus Garages Since 1948” by J Joyce (pub. Ian Allan Ltd, 1988) and of Saunders-bodied RT 4825 on route 55 – p.204 of Ken Blacker’s “RT” (Capital Transport Publishing, 1979).

My only shot of RT 4825 with its Saunders body is, sadly, rather blurred. It was taken in late-June 1965 at the Southall Brent Road terminus. Written on the reverse is: “The last week of 4825’s service at HW before overhaul”. I recall seeing the RT mid-evening in Lady Margaret Road, Southall and rushed home to get my camera and car, and then drove rather fast through Southall to Brent Road. My camera, a Kodak Brownie 44A using 127 film, was very basic with a single, slow shutter speed, useless for taking moving vehicles and I thought it much too risky to try guessing where the bus might stop, if anywhere, on its

27

journey through to Greenford. Fortunately, it was still on the stand but, unfortunately, the sky was quite dark by then and, having driven like a ****, I made a bit of a hash of the shot. Apologies, all. However, I do wonder if this might be the last photograph taken of 4825 with its Saunders body? I rather hope someone may have taken a better one. (See below).

RT 4325, Aldenham and CU Plates Alan BondJust a few notes on the LGOC/LT system of 'works float' overhauling. Prior to the opening of Chiswick works in 1923,it had been the practice for LGOC buses to be overhauled at their various body works such as Olaf Street and North Road, among others. In the days of horse buses there was little problem as the only licence required was a Hackney licence and these were issued at the time that the bus was presented for inspection to the Public Carriage Office, which, for many years, was at Penton Street in Islington. The licence was issued there and then and was validfor a year, after which it was returned and mostly they were re-issued, but not always to buses as they were the same for Hansom cabs and, later on, taxi(meter) cabs all which were licensed in the same way. With the advent of the motor bus in about 1899 it did not take long for the government to see these new-fangled vehicles as both a danger and an opportunity. The former was covered by the vehicle examiners' regime and Hackney licences continued to be required for buses up until the implementation of the provisions of the 1930 Road Traffic Act. The difference with motor buses was that they were required to carry identifying council issued registration letters and index marks and pay a separate tax for the use of the roads. This opened up problems for the LGOC with its increasing fleet of motor buses in that the Public Carriage Office still required the vehicles to be presented for examination on an annual basis. However overhauls were not carried out in a centralised works at the time and it was the normal practice for the bus to be driven to one of the body works to be removed for overhaul and the chassis was then returned to the owning garage for separate overhaul. This meant that though the bodies could be interchanged between vehicles of standard types the chassis was out of use for a period for which vehicle taxation had been paid but was it was not being used in revenue earning service. As the motor bus fleet grew in size, the sums expended meant a burgeoning financial outlay which was not covered by passenger revenue. By the early 1920sthis had become of some considerable concern to the management and shareholders.

Thus was born the idea of a central overhaul works wherein the bodies and chassis could be overhauled and re-united under a framework that allowed continuous licensing and so Chiswick works came into being. The overhaul system was arranged so that a bus with a licence arrived in works for overhaul to be replaced by one of identical type which was ready for dispatch. This was never a formal agreement with the licensing authorities but they were

28

not the least bit concerned as long as (a) the Police Examiners were satisfied that the vehicle was fit for service and (b) that the vehicle that emerged from works carried a valid vehicle taxation disc which meant that the local authority got the money they required. The financial saving was considerable as it meant that vehicle components, i.e. bodies and chassis and other bits and pieces in works could be worked on without the need to rush them back out into service. The float of spare bodies helped to even out the difference in timescale for body overhauls by comparison with those of chassis, which could be overhauled somewhat faster.

There was a crafty little twist in the system for some years where vehicles were given what was euphemistically referred to as 'garage overhauls', which were nothing of the kind but were actually what in later years were referredto as 'Dock' examinations followed by rectification/recertification. Until 1931 most of these received a new Hackney Licence for just six months instead of a year. Most of these were in and out of the garage dock in one day

With the implementation of the Road Traffic Act of 1930 not only was route licensing tightened up, vehicle examination and testing was carried out by Ministry appointed inspectors for the first time. In the transition from the previous system, many buses were granted exemption from testing for periods of up to three years depending on their state at the time of their last Police test at Penton Street. After that date, a bus could be granted a Certificate of Fitness for up to five years depending on the vehicle examiner's assessment of its condition. In post war years, this was extended to a maximum of seven years. Vehicles were still subject to an annual examination but if passed as fit, any minor defects found would need to be rectified with a specified time frame and subject to a further inspection if necessary.

The system continued thus until the start of World War Two when Chiswick mostly went over to war production with a much reduced bus responsibility, and overhaul work, such as it was, became delegated out to certain specified garages. The licensing of buses was then taken on by delegated personnel on behalf of the Ministry of Transport and this was known as Traffic Office Inspection or TOI for short. The testing regime was, of necessity, much less stringent and in the latter days of the war and for some years after many older buses received PSV 71 prohibition notices which, in many cases, led to them being withdrawn for scrap. In some cases it wasn't before timeas many were in a dire state.

After the war, bus availability was dire and many steps were taken to make sure that services were reliable and, with many buses receiving the dreaded PSV 71 prohibition notice, buses were necessarily hired in to cope with the demand, including a large number of Bristol buses from various operators around the country. When the RT family started to become available the pre-war and wartime buses were swept away gradually and by the time they had gone London Transport was keen to get back to the system in use before the war but there was a certain amount of resistance on the part of the Ministry Vehicle examiners, who then and until recently had a certain amount of flexibility in the way they interpreted the rules and eventually an agreement was reached whereby all LT bus chassis had to have a permanently allocated number by which they could be recognised regardless of the legal chassis number shown on the log book. The system came into effect towards the end of the first cycle overhaul forRTs and that resulted in some early RT chassis not receiving CU numbers until their second overhaul. RT 376 was an example of this as its chassis didn't receive its CU number until it went in to Aldenham for its second overhaul on 25th October 1954. Incidentally it was also one of many whose chassis was sent to Chiswick for overhaul during thatperiod.

It has to be emphasised that there was no governmental process involved in the scheme as all such agreements were made purely at the discretion of the Vehicle Inspectorate of The Ministry of Transport who had a certain amount of autonomy. Until recently that remained the case and I know from when I worked for Quantock Motor Services that vehicle inspection regimes for public service vehicles could be varied at the discretion of the vehicle examiners. At Quantock our service fleet of Leyland Tigers and such which were in daily use had a requirement to be inspected at six weekly intervals whereas the vehicles of the heritage fleet, most of which were not used on a daily basis, had a twelve weekly inspection regime apart, that is, from the open top buses used on the Exmoor Explorer 400 service which were inspected four weekly with particular attention being paid to the brakes on account of their regular 1:4 ascents and descents, with Porlock Hill being the telling point. In point of fact we went one better than that and inspected the brake linings on a weekly basis throughout the summer season.

[I thought it a good idea to include this immediately after Graham's item about the last RTs, if only to explain to new readers that almost all LT buses and coaches were not necessarily what it said on the side, the registration number or the official registration document. For decades we all knew that buses “swapped bodies” on overhaul at Aldenham but it was a well-kept secret that they also swapped chassis, so a bus was simply whatever LT said it wasat the time. If you happened to see RT 3456 in 1956 and 1967, chances were that the second sighting was of something entirely different from the first. As they used to say, “Only the names (numbers) have been changed to protect the innocent.” Those whose interests are not primarily London-based still have problems understanding all this and some have been known to get quite agitated and claim that it “should never have been allowed”, but then some enthusiasts can be a little odd at times! - Ed.]

29

Membership Renewals

May renewals: Nigel Lemon, John Marshall, Peter Plummer, Graham Smith, David Thomas, Keith Valla, John Wagstaff,Steve Whitelegg and Colin Wickens.

June renewals: Dan Cranefield and Peter Comfort.

Parts Available Free Paul FleetBeing locked down in Somerset has brought few benefits, although the garage has had a tidy up, the first since we moved to our current house last July. As a result of the ‘clear up’ I have found the following items that may be of interest to FOCLB members, all of which are FREE, other than the recipient paying the postage.

So, on offer are: 3 No. rubber bushes that fit into the indicator ears. All are new and previously stored undercover. 1 No. metal body for an indicator ear. It had previously been removed from GS 17 when in my ownership and would be suitable for refurbishing. There are no orange lenses nor rubber body though. 1 No. metal Pyrene Fire Extinguisher. It is of a similar pattern but does not have any LT markings nor a mounting bracket, but is in reasonably good condition and would look well on one of the family vehicles.

I can be contacted initially via e-mail at gsseventeen@btinternet.com, or when we are allowed out items can be collected from, or near, my home – which is just outside Taunton. It would be nice to see them all go to a new homerather than into a skip, which is the last thing that any of us would really like to see. Thank you for your continued work to keep the Newsletters flowing; picture that like of RLH 29 in Newsletter 162 evoke memories of my first ‘paid’ PSV driving job. She, along with classmate RLH 23 was used on peak time Rail Replacement services on a number of occasions in 1989 when the Watford – Croxley Green branch stock was put to use on main line services into Euston due to industrial troubles, (to the best of my memory). As you say, an under-rated class, and for the miles that I have driven in them, I’ve enjoyed every minute of it.

It worries me that it’s now over 9 years since I owned a bus of my own, and although I miss it, this (Somerset) is not the area that there are large numbers of events. I think (we) did the right thing selling GS 17 on when we did, and I understand that she has recently moved on again. Good luck to the new owner, whoever they are, and make sure she’s looked after! [See page 8, Paul. - Ed.]

GGGGGGGGGGGGGGG

Thanks to my many contributors, as a result of whose efforts the Newsletter is full this month so it will not be until next time that you can read the next instalment of Jim Andress's tales of RF 366. Stay safe in these uncertain times when information seems at best contradictory and if you have not much to do while under house arrest, why not write something for the Newsletter?

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

30