• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Bristol FLF ahead of its time

Status
Not open for further replies.
delt1c

delt1c

Established Member
Joined
4 Apr 2008
Messages
2,125
Thinking of the current London buses system with prepaid fare, made me wonder if the FLF was 40 years ahead of its time, no contact with driver required, card and ticket readers on the bus, front engine providing simplicity and ease of maintenance. Ok a more modern and fuel efficient engine and an additional door. But wonder how running costs would compare to a modern vehicle
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

C

carlberry

Established Member
Joined
19 Dec 2014
Messages
3,169
Modern engines are not fuel efficient! Most of the regulations since half cab double deckers existed have meant the fuel consumption has gone up (to make them more environmental acceptable). I believe in the last couple of years the average has started to come down a bit again however I don't think they're anywhere near what a decent Gardner would have returned.
 
delt1c

delt1c

Established Member
Joined
4 Apr 2008
Messages
2,125
carlberry said:
Modern engines are not fuel efficient! Most of the regulations since half cab double deckers existed have meant the fuel consumption has gone up (to make them more environmental acceptable). I believe in the last couple of years the average has started to come down a bit again however I don't think they're anywhere near what a decent Gardner would have returned.
Click to expand...
I agree that modern buses are nowhere near as efficient as halfcabs, i worked on LT in the early 80's and cam remember the published figures for fuel consumption where the RM was way more efficient than modern buses.
 
CD

CD

Member
Joined
22 Jun 2014
Messages
1,003
Location
34004
FLFs were very much under powered compared to modern vehicles. Plus a gearbox with no syncromesh, no power steering. After driving one from Luton to Aylesbury and back on United Counties 61 my arms were ready to fall off!
 
T

Teflon Lettuce

Established Member
Joined
22 Aug 2013
Messages
1,750
CD said:
FLFs were very much under powered compared to modern vehicles. Plus a gearbox with no syncromesh, no power steering. After driving one from Luton to Aylesbury and back on United Counties 61 my arms were ready to fall off!
Click to expand...
depends on which engine was fitted... a Gardner 6LXB was a powerful enough engine in it's day... and later FLF's were fitted with semi-auto gearboxes... certainly the FLF with it's air suspension and low flat floor could easily have been made accessible for wheelchairs with little modification.. so in that respect would have been a vehicle 40 years ahead of it's time!
 
A

A0wen

On Moderation
Joined
19 Jan 2008
Messages
7,479
delt1c said:
Thinking of the current London buses system with prepaid fare, made me wonder if the FLF was 40 years ahead of its time, no contact with driver required, card and ticket readers on the bus, front engine providing simplicity and ease of maintenance. Ok a more modern and fuel efficient engine and an additional door. But wonder how running costs would compare to a modern vehicle
Click to expand...

The Lodekka's biggest achievement was to be a low-bridge decker without looking ungainly unlike the AEC Bridgemaster.

I'm sure I read somewhere some Lodekkas had 5 speed boxes with the 5th on a separate 'plane' to the other gears i.e. it was offset from 4th, which meant if the bus stopped in 5th for any reason it was impossible to get it back into neutral!
 
T

Teflon Lettuce

Established Member
Joined
22 Aug 2013
Messages
1,750
A0wen said:
I'm sure I read somewhere some Lodekkas had 5 speed boxes with the 5th on a separate 'plane' to the other gears i.e. it was offset from 4th, which meant if the bus stopped in 5th for any reason it was impossible to get it back into neutral!
Click to expand...

I don't know about that problem, but I remember being told by an old hand that some of the United Counties Lodekkas had 5 speed boxes where the max speed in 4th was 38mph and the minimum speed required to get it into 5th was 42mph... result? you could only get into 5th if you was going downhill!
 
delt1c

delt1c

Established Member
Joined
4 Apr 2008
Messages
2,125
With the current desire for pre paid fares where the driver only drives , opens and closes the doors was the Loddeka FLF 50 years before its time? It had flat floor, driver secure in cab beside the engine and easy maintenance. OK this is a what if post wonder if intervening years had not seen removal of conductors and drivers collecting fares, wonder how the FLF could have evolved.
 
TheGrandWazoo

TheGrandWazoo

Veteran Member
Joined
18 Feb 2013
Messages
20,041
Location
Somerset with international travel (e.g. across th
To be honest, this thread is a bit like "if my aunt had b******s, she'd have been my uncle". The FLF was a solution to a particular problem at a particular time. Had technology and legislation in many facets gone other ways, it could be a multitude of outcomes. Indeed, had technology had been different earlier, there may never have been a Lodekka.
 
A

AndyW33

Member
Joined
12 Aug 2013
Messages
534
If the reason why the FLF was ahead of its time is because it has the entrance immediately behind the drivers cab (rather than the low overall height and step-free lower saloon), then goodness knows how far ahead was Midland Red with their FEDD forward entrance double deckers which entered service in the second half of the 1930s.
Then there's Ribble, with 100 Leyland PD3s fitted with forward entrance Burlingham bodies delivered in 1959 (followed up by another 140 with MetroCammell bodies) or the Southdown "Queen Mary" PD3s
 
C

carlberry

Established Member
Joined
19 Dec 2014
Messages
3,169
AndyW33 said:
If the reason why the FLF was ahead of its time is because it has the entrance immediately behind the drivers cab (rather than the low overall height and step-free lower saloon), then goodness knows how far ahead was Midland Red with their FEDD forward entrance double deckers which entered service in the second half of the 1930s.
Then there's Ribble, with 100 Leyland PD3s fitted with forward entrance Burlingham bodies delivered in 1959 (followed up by another 140 with MetroCammell bodies) or the Southdown "Queen Mary" PD3s
Click to expand...
Or the AEC Q which allowed it in 1932 (however most were bodied with central entrances).
 
Cambus731

Cambus731

Member
Joined
19 Jul 2013
Messages
1,121
The AEC Q double decker with the front entrance must have seemed REALLY odd in 1932.
If that idea had caught on, then OPO double deckers could have become common place about 30 years earlier than they eventually did
 
R

RT4038

Established Member
Joined
22 Feb 2014
Messages
4,230
Would have thought that the crash gearbox fitted to most FLFs, when pre-select and semi-automatic transmissions were universally available, would have put the bus behind the times rather than before. Sluggish, noisy buses!
 
H

harz99

Member
Joined
14 Jul 2009
Messages
732
Comparing an FLF with the RMF/BEA/NGT versions of the Routemaster make the FLF positively agricultural, considering both makes of vehicle were around at very similar times...
 
Cambus731

Cambus731

Member
Joined
19 Jul 2013
Messages
1,121
What do you mean by agricultural?
I personally believe the 30ft FLF with the later style of lower deck front bulkhead was an incredibly stylish bus. Especially the examples fitted with Cave-Browne-Cave heating.
I can remember in 1980/81 when I used to go to school on the Eastern National ones on the 56 in Chelmsford thinking how stylish they were. Of course I didn't know why some had those grills at the front and some didn't because I was 11/12. But I appreciated them as stylish buses and guessed they probably wouldn't be around for much longer.
I do like the forward entrance Routemasters, but IMO I don't think they were as handsome as the Bristol FLFs
 
TheGrandWazoo

TheGrandWazoo

Veteran Member
Joined
18 Feb 2013
Messages
20,041
Location
Somerset with international travel (e.g. across th
Cambus731 said:
What do you mean by agricultural?
I personally believe the 30ft FLF with the later style of lower deck front bulkhead was an incredibly stylish bus. Especially the examples fitted with Cave-Browne-Cave heating.
I can remember in 1980/81 when I used to go to school on the Eastern National ones on the 56 in Chelmsford thinking how stylish they were. Of course I didn't know why some had those grills at the front and some didn't because I was 11/12. But I appreciated them as stylish buses and guessed they probably wouldn't be around for much longer.
I do like the forward entrance Routemasters, but IMO I don't think they were as handsome as the Bristol FLFs
Click to expand...

Think it’s more technological than aesthetically. When you consider that the Lodekka had a crash gearbox when new, it’s a bit unsophisticated compared to the Routemaster. Then you consider that when the first Lodekka was being exhibited, Leyland were just starting to design what would become the Atlanteans.

The Lodekka was an innovative design and no one can argue that it wasn’t a good bus. However, it certainly had limitations. Also, in terms of performance, the Bristol and Gardner engines were know for being a bit ponderous.
 
delt1c

delt1c

Established Member
Joined
4 Apr 2008
Messages
2,125
harz99 said:
Comparing an FLF with the RMF/BEA/NGT versions of the Routemaster make the FLF positively agricultural, considering both makes of vehicle were around at very similar times...
Click to expand...
As much as The RM was advanced it didnt have the flat floor so in today's enviroment wouldnt have met requirements
 
delt1c

delt1c

Established Member
Joined
4 Apr 2008
Messages
2,125
TheGrandWazoo said:
There's a lot of today's requirements that the RM or FLF wouldn't have been able to meet.
Click to expand...
But evolution would have met those requirements. I remember when I worked for LT an RM could come in from the morning peak, have an engine change an be back out for the pm peak. could that happen today ?
 
Busaholic

Busaholic

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Jun 2014
Messages
14,088
Cambus731 said:
What do you mean by agricultural?
I personally believe the 30ft FLF with the later style of lower deck front bulkhead was an incredibly stylish bus. Especially the examples fitted with Cave-Browne-Cave heating.
I can remember in 1980/81 when I used to go to school on the Eastern National ones on the 56 in Chelmsford thinking how stylish they were. Of course I didn't know why some had those grills at the front and some didn't because I was 11/12. But I appreciated them as stylish buses and guessed they probably wouldn't be around for much longer.
I do like the forward entrance Routemasters, but IMO I don't think they were as handsome as the Bristol FLFs
Click to expand...
I agree with you about the stylishness of the FLF, and coming from a lifelong London bus obsessive, that is high praise indeed. Eastern National, from what I've read over the years, were particularly struck by theirs and tried everything to show them off to advantage. My only personal experience of one of theirs was, as a child, being taken on one shortly after their introduction to the Wood Green trunk routes, on a long journey. Being a child, I was only interested in the top deck, but at my age now the level lower deck would be more of a boon! The Routemaster's increase in length from 28 ft to 30 ft midway through the production process should have been handled better (i.e. more expensively) because the effect of the extra half bay was, if not a disaster aesthetically speaking, very unpleasing.
 
delt1c

delt1c

Established Member
Joined
4 Apr 2008
Messages
2,125
Busaholic said:
I agree with you about the stylishness of the FLF, and coming from a lifelong London bus obsessive, that is high praise indeed. Eastern National, from what I've read over the years, were particularly struck by theirs and tried everything to show them off to advantage. My only personal experience of one of theirs was, as a child, being taken on one shortly after their introduction to the Wood Green trunk routes, on a long journey. Being a child, I was only interested in the top deck, but at my age now the level lower deck would be more of a boon! The Routemaster's increase in length from 28 ft to 30 ft midway through the production process should have been handled better (i.e. more expensively) because the effect of the extra half bay was, if not a disaster aesthetically speaking, very unpleasing.
Click to expand...
I agree whilst the RML met requirements that extra small window midway looked very poor
 
S

Sir Felix Pole

Member
Joined
21 Oct 2012
Messages
938
Location
Wilmslow
I have mixed feelings about the 'FLF'- they were certainly handsome and stylish buses with an innovative design, but let down by under-powered engines and crash gearboxes which was not remedied until the final batches. Western and Southern National had quite large fleets of 'FLFs', so growing up in Devon I travelled on them quite extensively, particularly on Routes 83 and 83A (later 84) Tavistock to Plymouth where they served until 1976/7. They particularly struggled between Yelverton and Tavistock, even though the gradients were very minor by Devon standards. I remember heavily-loaded peak-hour services being reduced to a crawl as drivers wrestled with the gearbox and queues of traffic piling up behind. They were also used on the 132 Plymouth to Bideford service which passed through Tavistock, a marathon 3 hour journey with Plymouth and Bideford drivers swopping over between Launceston and Holsworthy. It was not for the faint-hearted, driver or passenger.

In Plymouth they were used extensively on the cross-city 'Joint Services', but it has to be said they contrasted very unfavourably with the Corporation's 'Atlanteans' which were among the first in the country. They were also used on Route 93 Plymouth to Dartmouth via Kingsbridge, a 2 hour marathon. I didn't travel this route until 'VR' days, but it must have been fun in a 'FLF' on the hairpin-bend leaving Slapton Sands and on the gradients around Blackpool Sands.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top