With – Newcastle Corporation
1963
Daimler Fleetline CRG6LX
Alexander H44/34F

565 CRW; 1963 H44/34F Alexander bodied Daimler Fleetline CRG6LX demonstrator:
Over the years, Newcastle Corporation had quite a number of Daimlers, both double and single deck, with a variety of bodies from different coachbuilders, but with the demise of the half cab in favour of front entrance rear engine buses they stayed very firmly entrenched in the Leyland camp. However, that’s not to say that they didn’t dip a toe in the water. This Daimler demonstrator pictured at Tynemouth is on loan to Newcastle Corporation. The service 11 ran from Newcastle Haymarket to Tynemouth, and was shared by NCT and NGT’s Percy Main depot. When it first started in 1928, the operating licences were divided equally between Newcastle Corporation, Tynemouth and District Transport, and Wakefields Motors Ltd. Wakefields subsequently became part of the NGT group, but all their operators licences remained in their name, so officially, three Percy Main vehicles on this route either had to carry the Wakefields name, or display an ‘On hire to Wakefields’ sticker, needless to say, this was a formality that was frequently overlooked.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Ronnie Hoye

24/02/14 – 07:50

Two Demonstrators were shown at the 1960 Commercial Motor Show, one was a chassis, the other a CRD6 model, with chassis No.60000, the well known 7000HP, in Birmingham City Transport livery, shown above.

This bus later ended up with the Blue Bus Services (Tailby and George) fleet at Willington in Derbyshire, and was totally destroyed in the disastrous fire in January 1976. See here:- www.stephenhowarth.co.uk/ 

Blue Bus Services (Tailby and George) also took 5 more Fleetlines one of which was the first production chassis – 60003, bodies by Northern Counties in 1962, 324 YNU. Seen here in the 3rd picture negotiating flood waters (just shows they are not a modern problem as the press would have us think), on the Derby to Burton via Etwall service, later to be numbered 46 by Derby Borough Transport on the takeover by that concern in 1974.

Stephen Howarth

25/02/14 – 14:42

Thanks for posting this, Ronnie. I found it rather intriguing! The vehicle shown is, indeed 565 CRW, and I have a bought colour shot of her in a livery with slightly more cream. What intrigues me is that I have vague memories of a Daimler/Alexander demonstrator with an awkwardly similar registration, namely 595 CRW. Were there really two of them, or is my memory card in need of replacement???

Pete Davies

25/02/14 – 17:14

Here’s another demonstrator on the 11 Tynemouth to Newcastle, arriving at the Haymarket. Photo by Bob Mack.
Atlantean SGD 669 started life as Glasgow Corporation LA91 then returned to Leyland for use as a demonstrator, afterwards moving on to the Fishwick fleet in Leyland as their no. 34.
IIRC it was in Newcastle during 1964, AFTER the Corporation had committed to this style of bodywork in 1963 on the first trolleybus replacement Atlanteans (1-12 JVK) so I’m not sure what it was demonstrating at the time! Or was it working with Tynemouth, Ronnie?
Does anyone know why this vehicle was chosen for its wider role? Did it initially have any features different from the Glasgow standard? I think (fatal!) that its green panels were changed to matching yellow for its time in Newcastle, so perhaps other modifications happened as well. Did it run in Glasgow colours while in Halifax?

Tony Fox

26/02/14 – 07:40

Glasgow had loaned different Atlanteans to Leyland for demonstration work. Theirs were 30′-8" long and with this stylish Alexander body would have conveyed the modern image of a bus that Leyland would wish to portray. Glasgow and Leyland came to an agreement to part with LA91, replaced later with LA202, presumably to make a vehicle immediately available to Leyland. A six-month wait would risk letting Daimler seize the opportunity. As a demonstrator its Glasgow livery was certainly changed to one more like the Newcastle one, without the green.
I am pretty sure there was no 595 CRW, or at least a Fleetline with that number, but 565 CRW certainly demonstrated in two liveries as it appeared at Halifax in both guises.

David Beilby

26/02/14 – 07:41

Can’t say for certain, Tony. I started at Percy Main in January 1967, so this was before my time, however, by 1963, T&D had 22 PDR1/1’s, which was roughly a quarter of the D/D fleet. In 1963, they took delivery of the first of two batches of Weymann bodied CRG6LX Fleetlines, followed by three batches of Alexander bodied versions in 65/7&8. I lived close to Percy Main depot, and took a keen interest in what went on. From memory, demonstrators were usually to be found working the very busy stop start Whitley Bay to Lobley Hill Gateshead service 1, which was a greater test of stamina than the equally busy but less demanding service 11. If you want my opinion, I would say that it was with NCT rather than Tynemouth.

Ronnie Hoye

26/02/14 – 07:43

Pete, there were no other Fleetline demonstrators around at the time of 565 CRW. I think it replaced 4559VC, a Northern Counties-bodied example which went on to spend many years with Procter’s of Hanley.
Tony, although SGD 669 is nowadays widely-referred to as being ‘ex-Glasgow’, I have to cast doubt on the notion that it actually reached there. Leyland had already, on separate occasions, borrowed two Glasgow Atlanteans, I think they were LA6 and LA83. It was then announced that Glasgow had agree to ‘sell’ LA91 – but it is my recollection that at that time deliveries had not reached that point, and, if that was the case, LA91 would still be in build. Also, it does seem unlikely that Leyland would buy back an already-delivered vehicle when identical ones were still being completed at the rate of, probably, two a week.
SGD 669 took up its demonstration duties in mock Newcastle Corporation livery – there again, why repaint a bus after a week or two in service, when one could be painted to order from scratch?
You’ll see that I said Glasgow had agreed to ‘sell’ LA91 – but it was ultimately replaced by LA152, which was effectively added to the next order for fifty similar buses. So the situation would appear to have been a bit more involved than a simple ‘sale’.
To the question of whether it ran in Halifax in Glasgow colours, I’m obviously doubting that it ever received those colours, and I’m pretty certain that it didn’t do any demonstrating in them.
There’s actually already a page on OBP devoted to SGD 669. www.old-bus-photos.co.uk/?p=581

David Call

26/02/14 – 07:45

When the Atlantean was demonstrated in Aberdeen it was painted yellow and cream Newcastle style.
From memory it had also been in France, the wording on the offside was "Ici Le Leyland Atlantean 78 places".
565 CRW saw service with both Grahams of Paisley and Moffat and Williamson of Gauldry.

Stephen Bloomfield

26/02/14 – 12:10

565 CRW demonstrated at Halifax three times. The first time, in April 1964, it was in a different livery to that depicted above, using a deep brownish maroon and a rich cream. It returned to Halifax in October 1964 to demonstrate to Hebble in the same livery. It returned to the Corporation again in September 1965, by which time it had been repainted in the Edinburgh style with a lighter, more Edinburgh-like red, but with more of an ivory relief colour, rather than Edinburgh’s white. It paid a longer third visit in August/September 1966, just prior to the Corporation’s own first Fleetlines being delivered, still in the same livery. I think much of its extended stay involved some engineering familiarisation.
SGD 669 demonstrated to Halifax in May/June 1964. It was in a Newcastle-style livery, and I recall the interior was rather plain with a lot of darkish green rexene. It returned to the area to demonstrate to Hebble in October/November 1964. There is a nice photo of it working for Halifax Corporation here: www.sct61.org.uk/hxsgd699

John Stringer

26/02/14 – 13:06

Something has just struck me regarding the Alexander body. On such a modern design for the period, why did they continue with rear mudguards when others had abandoned them? It looks particularly odd given the lack of matching ones for the front wheels.

Phil Blinkhorn

26/02/14 – 14:11

If memory serves, Phil, the rear wings were rubber, and so less prone to accidental damage when removing the wheels, especially the inners.

Ronnie Hoye

27/02/14 – 07:38

Here is Daimler Fleetline 565 CRW in King Cross Road, Halifax en route from Hebden Bridge to Brighouse when on hire to HPTD in the summer of 1965. The picture was taken late in the evening when I spotted the bus and just managed to get off a shot (with entirely guessed exposure settings) as I walked home, hence the indifferent quality of the picture.

Roger Cox

28/02/14 – 07:54

The hopper windows were uncommon in those days, I can’t recall any local Operators using them (ECW fitted them to Lodekkas etc). Was this body tagged on to one for regular Alexander users (Glasgow or SBG?) Maybe they specified them? They look much neater tan sliders.

Ian Wild

01/03/14 – 13:36

565 CRW had an A-type body with body number A/1363. Alexander’s body numbering was a bit erratic at the time as they kept changing the system, but the only other A-types ordered around the same time seem to have been A/1663 for AA, Ayr (XSD 430); A/1963 for McGill, Barrhead (AHS 16B); A/2063 for Graham, Paisley (HXS 864). Looking at photos of these three on the web show that all had normal sliding windows.

John Stringer

29/06/14 – 07:17

I am sure 565 CRW worked for Harper Bros (Heath Hayes) as a demonstrator for a while in the mid sixties, but if my memory is correct there was a lot more cream livery on it then.

Keith Harley

20/11/15 – 14:12

Significant information just published in Buses Mag December 2015 page 84 reveals that 565 CRW was shown at 1963 Scottish Motor Show in Glasgow Corporation colours, finished to Glasgow spec.
Having a life-long interest in Fleetlines I was not aware of this but Alan Millar confirms this was the case. Buses Illustrated January 1964 issue page 7 states "By the time this column went to press no order had been placed by G.C.T. for another Fleetline" (GCT already had SGD 730, new in May 1963) "But the Show model was finished in G.C.T. colours and to G.C.T. specification" Has anyone seen a picture of 565 CRW in Glasgow colours?

Jim Neale

Vehicle reminder shot for this posting

25/10/16 – 14:22

I always liked that Alexander body style on Atlanteans and Fleetlines. Bury had 15 on Fleetline chassis, 117-131, later Selnec 6317-31. They were the only ones in the combined fleet after the PTE took over with the highbridge version of the body, although North Western had quite a few with the low height version. Bury had one of those for a short time, YJA 2, in overall advertising livery for Quicks for Ford.

David Pomfret

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

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

Photograph and Copy contributed by Don McKeown

16/01/14 – 06:23

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

David Oldfield

16/01/14 – 06:24

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

Pete Davies

16/01/14 – 06:25

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

Philip Rushworth

16/01/14 – 08:42

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

David Oldfield

16/01/14 – 09:02

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

Phil Blinkhorn

16/01/14 – 11:02

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

David Oldfield

16/01/14 – 11:03

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

Mike Morton

16/01/14 – 14:07

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

Roger Cox

17/01/14 – 08:25

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

Diesel Dave

17/01/14 – 08:26

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

Geoff Kerr

17/01/14 – 09:19

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

Phil Blinkhorn

17/01/14 – 17:53

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

Mike Franks

18/01/14 – 07:45

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

Phil Blinkhorn

18/01/14 – 07:46

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

Peter Williamson

19/01/14 – 08:21

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

Roger Cox

19/01/14 – 09:41

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

Pete Davies

19/06/17 – 07:14

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

Robert Walsh

20/06/17 – 07:19

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

David Call

21/06/17 – 07:19

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

Peter Cook

21/06/17 – 07:20

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

David Oldfield

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

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

Photograph and Copy contributed by Roger Cox

01/09/13 – 14:42

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

Chris Youhill

02/09/13 – 06:00

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

Nigel Turner

02/09/13 – 08:00

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

Roger Cox

02/09/13 – 08:00

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

Trevor Leach

02/09/13 – 16:15

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

Chris Youhill

02/09/13 – 16:15

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

Michael Hampton

02/09/13 – 16:15

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

Stephen Bloomfield

03/09/13 – 06:00

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

Stephen Howarth

03/09/13 – 06:00

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

David Call

03/09/13 – 16:30

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

Roger Cox

03/09/13 – 16:30

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

Geoff Kerr

19/10/13 – 17:19

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

Jim Neale

16/03/16 – 15:34

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

Stephen Allcroft

17/03/16 – 10:48

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

Jim Neale

17/03/16 – 15:19

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

Chris Hebbron

17/03/16 – 15:20

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

Stephen Allcroft

18/03/16 – 05:38

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

Jim Neale

18/03/16 – 05:39

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

Roger Cox

19/03/16 – 06:42

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

Stephen Allcroft

12/05/16 – 15:53

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

Roger Cox

24/08/16 – 06:03

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

Lindsay Hancock