News:
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: Buses  (Read 35591 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

seafordpete

  • Guest
Re: Buses
« Reply #63 on: October 24, 2011, 13:22:51 »
Did the 25 go into W Mallling or just pass it on the A20?  Hated the DLs always smashed my head if downstairs or fell into the trough footway upstairs, after negociating 3 other people on the bench seat

Offline peterchall

  • Established Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3620
  • Appreciation 186
  • 25.06.1929 - 12.03.2016
Re: Buses
« Reply #62 on: October 24, 2011, 13:02:14 »
Yes, it does. It looks like I was thinking of the wrong bridge. The 1951 M&D timetable shows 3 routes between East and West Malling - No20 that I've already mentioned; No9, Maidstone to Sevenoaks; and No25, Maidstone to Wrotham. I know Nos 9 and 20 used lo-deckers, and presumably No25 used them or single deckers.
It's no use getting old if you don't get artful

Offline mikeb

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 522
  • Appreciation 27
Re: Buses
« Reply #61 on: October 24, 2011, 11:57:55 »
The railway bridge out of Maidstone on the A20 at Allington, aka "Kent Messenger Bridge" to old(er) bus men, is high enough to take a standard height bus. Maidstone depot, and Borough Green, had an allocation of low bridge double deckers in order to pass under the bridge between East & West Malling. In my day these were all Fleetlines although Maidstone did acquire one of the low bridge Atlanteans from Hastings for a while. Buses operating Maidstone - West Malling direct were / are of a standard height. Modern double deck buses are, as far as I know all standard height, the same as standard height front engined buses of yore. To-day if operators have a low bridge to negotiate they buy high capacity single deckers. As far as I know, and I stand to be corrected, no manufacturer offers a low height double decker.

Hope this helps.

Offline peterchall

  • Established Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3620
  • Appreciation 186
  • 25.06.1929 - 12.03.2016
Re: Buses
« Reply #60 on: October 24, 2011, 11:38:32 »
Thanks. Like Torpointblue earlier, i'm glad to have my memory confirmed. Now to clarify a further point if possible - due to the lower floor, are today's 'standard' double deckers lower than the old front engined/rear platform ones? I ask because they use the A20 London Road out of Maidstone, passing under the same railway bridge (with presumably the same clearance) that once required the old lo-deckers.
It's no use getting old if you don't get artful

Offline mikeb

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 522
  • Appreciation 27
Re: Buses
« Reply #59 on: October 24, 2011, 10:49:34 »
Quote
With the advent of the rear engined bus, such as the Leyland Atlantean, there was no need for a prop-shaft to run the length of the vehicle, so the floor could be low anyway. Nevertheless, I have a vague memory of M&D having some Atlanteans with the lo-deck configuration, thus giving a 'lo-lo-decker' - can anyone confirm?

Quite right peterchall. They were outwardly the same as a "normal" height Atlantean, just not so high. Fourteen of the original order of fifty Atlanteans were of low height  for operating under a low bridge in the Hastings area, I believe Cooden Railway Bridge. All initial fifty were allocated to Hastings as trolleybus replacements in 1959. Thereafter M&D only took Daimler Fleetlines when a low bridge type was required.

Hope this confirms your memory!

Offline chasg

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 171
  • Appreciation 13
Re: Buses
« Reply #58 on: October 24, 2011, 04:27:21 »

Offline Lyn L

  • Established Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1127
  • Appreciation 84
Re: Buses
« Reply #57 on: October 23, 2011, 17:14:47 »
I remember those buses, but that was in the Ramsgate  and Broadstairs area and must have been in the 50s sometime, perhaps the bridges were low there ?  the one for the railway in Broadstairs seemed low, we always 'ducked' when we went under it  :) but what they were I have no idea it was just a bus to young child.
Half our life is spent trying to find something to do with the time we have rushed through life tryi

Offline peterchall

  • Established Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3620
  • Appreciation 186
  • 25.06.1929 - 12.03.2016
Re: Buses
« Reply #56 on: October 23, 2011, 17:05:52 »
Bristols made a low height double decker, called the 'Lodekka', that had the normal centre gangway layout on the top deck. This was acheived by lowering the bottom deck by using a drop-centre rear axle with the prop-shaft drive from the gearbox passing down one side of the bus to the rear axle, clear of the gangway. This meant that there was a bulge in the floor passing under the seats nearest the side (I think left side) of the lower deck; the drive then had to be taken across to the other side by a system of gears to a low shaft passing across under the flooor, with more gears to bring the drive up to the centre of the road wheel on that side. Complex and expensive, and it seems that M&D didn't have any. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bristol_Lodekka

With the advent of the rear engined bus, such as the Leyland Atlantean, there was no need for a prop-shaft to run the length of the vehicle, so the floor could be low anyway. Nevertheless, I have a vague memory of M&D having some Atlanteans with the lo-deck configuration, thus giving a 'lo-lo-decker' - can anyone confirm?
It's no use getting old if you don't get artful

Offline Paul

  • Established Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1481
  • Appreciation 64
  • Batpigs'n'Boobies.. ;)
Re: Buses
« Reply #55 on: October 23, 2011, 14:19:57 »
Maybe it's big horse I'm a Londoner. :{

torpointblue

  • Guest
Re: Buses
« Reply #54 on: October 23, 2011, 13:36:33 »
Many thanks Peterchall.I'm glad I'm not going crazy . Must have been for relief use as you say because we rarely had one like that . Just remembered it because it was different .

Offline peterchall

  • Established Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3620
  • Appreciation 186
  • 25.06.1929 - 12.03.2016
Re: Buses
« Reply #53 on: October 23, 2011, 13:15:37 »
This was the lo-bridge layout that reduced the height of a double decker for use on routes that had a low bridge on the way. They wouldn't have been in regular use on Service 1 to Maidstone because there were no low bridges. The only service that I can recall needing lo-bridge buses from the Medway Towns was Service 20, via Snodland, West Malling etc, to Maidstone, because of a low bridge on London Road just outside Maidstone. Any service from Maidstone along that road needed them, such as to Sevenoaks.

Lo-bridge buses in the M&D fleet were numbered DLxxx, as compared to DHxxx for normal height double deckers.
It's no use getting old if you don't get artful

torpointblue

  • Guest
Re: Buses
« Reply #52 on: October 23, 2011, 12:56:31 »
Sorry I cant recall bus names and types but I need confirmation of a seating arrangement that nobody I've spoken too can ever remember. Please somebody tell me I'm not going mad :-).. I lived on Twydall Estate and went too Napier Road School. So I'm talking about the No1 bus route. Circa 1960. Upstairs there was one footwell Isle on the right hand side . You had to step up into the seats which were 4 seater benches . This arrangement caused for head hight on the right hand side of the lower deck was approx 9 inches lower . anybody else remember this ???

Offline Paolo

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 68
  • Appreciation 14
Buses
« Reply #51 on: June 05, 2011, 19:54:07 »
Fascinating pictures of East Kent buses but does anybody remember/have information or pictures on  Sargents single-decker buses that ran from Folkestone to Hythe in the late 40s or early 50s?  I believe they used the same stops and route as the 103/103a from Wood Avenue to the Light Railway. 

Online DaveTheTrain

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 313
  • Appreciation 18
Buses
« Reply #50 on: April 16, 2011, 18:48:10 »
I see that GKE 68 has come up in this thread, I hope nobody minds, or they may be interested in the pics I have of GKE 68, taken about 7 or 8 years ago.  They were forwarded to me when the owners were looking for a buyer to take the vehicle on.  As a collector of scrap / interesting old iron I was a potential candidate but did not have the room at the time with several other vintage vehicles to stable, although an old bus will one day feature in the plans.

Anyhow, here goes









Regards
Dave

Offline chuffchuff

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 21
  • Appreciation 2
Buses
« Reply #49 on: February 15, 2011, 12:33:19 »
Friend was working on this
Getting a good rub down




Paint all done




Non standard interior


 

BloQcs design by Bloc
SMF 2.0.11 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines