Vehicle History: Leyland Fleetline (was DMS discussion)

[Kremlin Stooge]

From a basic perspective, you're right - the Atlantean was Leyland engined, the Fleetline Gardner engined. And the VR came with either.

You've actually got to look back to the mid 60s to see how this all came into being. Leyland, Daimler and Bristol were all "independent" companies in their own right - and each had their own customer base.

Bristol supplied the Tilling group of companies - which eventually became part of the NBC.

Leyland had a following among the BET companies though there were some who also took Daimlers e.g. Potteries. - and some municipals.

Daimler were used by many Municipals and Scottish companies. They did have a following among some BET companies, but it tended to be for certain loyalties e.g. Midland Red.

All of these were merged together in the various buy-outs and mergers that created British Leyland in the late 60s - so BL then had 3 double-deck chassis which were in effect competing with each other, the Atlantean, VR and Fleetline. Each had their own following as well.

The NBC, by virtue of many of its companies being ex Tilling, went for the VR - though there were NBC subsidiaries that bought Atlanteans (London Country, Ribble), and Fleetlines (Midland Red, Oxford South Midland).

Many municipals and SBG companies remained loyal to the Fleetline - and others remained loyal to Leyland.

So BL had a problem - and consolidation was inevitable. Of the 3 - the VR was the youngest (announced in 1966), the Fleetline next (1960) and then the Atlantean (1958), however the Atlantean was extensively re-worked in around 1970 with the AN68 version replacing the PDR series. So by the mid 70s - the Fleetline was actually the oldest design. Add in the decision to close Daimler's works in the West Mids and re-locate production to Lancashire, it was pretty obvious the Fleetline's days were numbered.

This, along with the general supply and production issues BL had, meant there was a gap for others - such as Dennis with the Dominator, the Ailsa B55 and Metropolitan / Metrobus to enter the market. But only the Metrobus really made an impact.

BL's plan was always to consolidate further - initially the Titan was thought to be the way forward - again LT speccing a bus with Leyland - but even with a Gardner engine, that wasn't appealing to many operators who thought it was too complicated and too expensive. Ironically it was the Olympian, which was really the successor to the Bristol VR which won out - surviving the Volvo takeover of Leyland Bus and being in production for almost 20 years.

Some great historical context there, thank you.

I'm in the unusual (for this forum) position of having worked on and driven Atlanteans and Fleetlines, as a preservationist. From photos, the two chassis types look almost identical but in fact they're really, really different. The Fleetline has a Gardner 6LX (later 6LXB) engine*, a drop-centre rear axle (which is how they achieved the low height capability) and a very different gearbox and transmission layout to the Atlantean. The Atlantean has a Leyland O.680 engine, beam rear axle and a mechanical accelerator (hydraulic on a Fleetline, which meant being booked for 'low on power' when in fact it was air in the hydraulics). One isn't really better than the other, they're just different. I'd much rather adjust the brakes on an Atlantean, I'd prefer to do the head gasket on a Fleetline.

In terms of driving, it's just preference but many/most drivers would say that an Atlantean has more get-up-and-go than a Fleetline; but the accountant upstairs would prefer a Gardner to a Leyland engine due to a Gardner being more economical on fuel.

* the Leyland engine became an option on later Fleetlines, but you could never buy an Atlantean with a Gardner engine.

With hindsight, your last sentence is key: I take the view that a lot of strife could have been avoided with the traditional Fleetline operators (some of whom were mightily miffed) if Leyland had made a Gardner option available for the Atlantean. Admittedly I might be being a bit unfair, but Leyland’s approach to its customers during the 1970s could be crystallised as “We know what you want better than you do - and we’re going to supply it, whether you want it or not”! At which point, some Fleet Engineering or Purchasing Directors said to their secretaries “Miss Bloggs, get me the phone number for Dennis/MCW/Volvo”...

 

[Swanny200]

Some great historical context there, thank you.

With hindsight, your last sentence is key: I take the view that a lot of strife could have been avoided with the traditional Fleetline operators (some of whom were mightily miffed) if Leyland had made a Gardner option available for the Atlantean. Admittedly I might be being a bit unfair, but Leyland’s approach to its customers during the 1970s could be crystallised as “We know what you want better than you do - and we’re going to supply it, whether you want it or not”! At which point, some Fleet Engineering or Purchasing Directors said to their secretaries “Miss Bloggs, get me the phone number for Dennis/MCW/Volvo”...

Exactly this, A Gardner Atlantean would have been the best of both worlds I imagine, the amount of people that said the whole of British Leyland was like that, it seemed like they just wanted to amalgamate so many brands under one umbrella and think that everyone would get along and have some sort of car/bus/truck monopoly/

 

[Typhoon]

WMPTE bought a sizeable number, something like 50, converted to single door, to overcome a vehicle shortage. I seem to remember some at least at Selly Oak and, I think, Harborne garages.

 

[A0wen]

With hindsight, your last sentence is key: I take the view that a lot of strife could have been avoided with the traditional Fleetline operators (some of whom were mightily miffed) if Leyland had made a Gardner option available for the Atlantean. Admittedly I might be being a bit unfair, but Leyland’s approach to its customers during the 1970s could be crystallised as “We know what you want better than you do - and we’re going to supply it, whether you want it or not”! At which point, some Fleet Engineering or Purchasing Directors said to their secretaries “Miss Bloggs, get me the phone number for Dennis/MCW/Volvo”...

I don't disagree - but I think the key to it is Leyland were both a chassis and engine maker - whereas Daimler and Bristol both bought in their engines, usually from Gardner.

I guess Leyland wanted 'both bites of the cherry' and not to have to pay somebody else for an engine. It came unstuck with the National, where the 510 engine, though technically advanced, was unreliable initially and disliked by operators who found it difficult to maintain. They learnt their lesson with the National 2 - which came with the option of both Leyland 680 and Gardner - and the Olympian which came with the Leyland TL11 and Gardner options.

 

[DunsBus]

Yes, I think you’re correct, though it was something of an arms-length subsidiary, only really becoming integrated when Olympian production started at Bristol. At the risk of causing more thread drift, there are some diehards who still regard the Olympian as a Series 4 VRT!

Indeed. Some early Olympians were taxed as Bristols - I suspect at the request of those who couldn't accept that the Bristol name died with the VR - and this then spawned the Bristol Olympian myth. I always say to those who claim that Bristol Olympians do exist "show me a Bristol Olympian build certificate or a Bristol Olympian service and parts manual". They usually go quiet then.

 

[Robertj21a]

WMPTE bought a sizeable number, something like 50, converted to single door, to overcome a vehicle shortage. I seem to remember some at least at Selly Oak and, I think, Harborne garages.

80 I think, all converted by Ensigns.

 

[busesrusuk]

Yes 80. This was one of the first bulk orders for DMS's for Ensign's and IIRC all were MCW bodied examples...

 

[GusB]

The thread has drifted a little from the original DMS topic, however there have been many interesting posts and I think it appropriate that we widen the scope of the thread to cover a general Fleetline history, of which the DMS is part. The histories of the other chassis types are also of interest and are somewhat intertwined, but please let's not get overly bogged down in in-depth discussions about these - separate threads for specific vehicle types would be welcomed, and would also provide a useful resource for anyone searching for information on a particular type of bus.

So BL had a problem - and consolidation was inevitable. Of the 3 - the VR was the youngest (announced in 1966), the Fleetline next (1960) and then the Atlantean (1958), however the Atlantean was extensively re-worked in around 1970 with the AN68 version replacing the PDR series. So by the mid 70s - the Fleetline was actually the oldest design. Add in the decision to close Daimler's works in the West Mids and re-locate production to Lancashire, it was pretty obvious the Fleetline's days were numbered.

I'm in the unusual (for this forum) position of having worked on and driven Atlanteans and Fleetlines, as a preservationist. From photos, the two chassis types look almost identical but in fact they're really, really different. The Fleetline has a Gardner 6LX (later 6LXB) engine*, a drop-centre rear axle (which is how they achieved the low height capability) and a very different gearbox and transmission layout to the Atlantean. The Atlantean has a Leyland O.680 engine, beam rear axle and a mechanical accelerator (hydraulic on a Fleetline, which meant being booked for 'low on power' when in fact it was air in the hydraulics). One isn't really better than the other, they're just different. I'd much rather adjust the brakes on an Atlantean, I'd prefer to do the head gasket on a Fleetline.

Just to add to these comments, the Atlantean (PDR series) did have a low-height option which utilised the drop-centre rear axle from the Albion Lowlander. The first version was the PDR1/2 which used the same Daimler gearbox as the Fleetline. This was then updated to the PDR1/3 which used the rationalised pneumocyclic gearbox.

The Fleetline CRL6, with Leyland 680 engine, was introduced in 1970. The PDR1/3 was dropped in 1971 and the AN68 series was introduced in 1972, so anyone who wanted a low-height capable bus with Leyland engine could continue with the Fleetline.

I don't disagree - but I think the key to it is Leyland were both a chassis and engine maker - whereas Daimler and Bristol both bought in their engines, usually from Gardner.

Daimler and Bristol did manufacture their own engines at one point. I think the last Bristol engines went into FLFs (happy to be corrected here) and the first three Fleetline chassis were designated as CRD6, signifying Daimler engines.

 

[Strathclyder]

As @GusB has allowed the scope of this thread to be widened from the DMS to the Fleetline as a whole, I thought I'd mention a noted, not to mention erstwhile, operator of the type for a number of years: Graham's Bus Service of Paisley.

In addition to off-the-shelf Alexander examples and the DMS examples, they also had a few noteworthy examples in their ranks over the years: a ex-Road Transport Industry Training Board single-deck Willowbrook-bodied example (YNR 935R/S6) and the sole example operated by Glasgow Corporation (SGD 730/D15) amongst the legions of Atlanteans. Images of both of these machines linked below (part of the Southlancs & megaanorak Flickr collections respectively).

YNR935J

Grahams of Paisley S6 - Daimler SRG6LX / Willowbrook.

www.flickr.com

Graham, Paisley: D15 (SGD730) in Gauze Street, Paisley

1963 Daimler Fleetline CRG6LX Alexander H44/34F New to Glasgow Corporation, no. D268

www.flickr.com

And further to the DMSes that were exported to the Far East (lifted from the Scania Metropolitan thread):

All 50 of the XA class Atlantean's (and a significant stock of spares) went to China Motor Bus; this included 3 that had transferred to London Country on its formation. It is said that they wanted the 8 Fleetline's (XF class) as well but that request was refused. Additional buses were required by the Hong Kong operators following the opening of the cross harbour tunnel and the success of the new cross harbour bus routes.

China Motor Bus took over 200 DMS buses in the early 80's and ran them until 1996. But we digress (again!).

Indeed (they took 210 DMSes to be precise), and to round out the CMB DMS story, some were latterly converted to trainers after their passenger-carrying days were over. None lasted into the New World First Bus era as far as I can tell, although a handful lasted well into 1998 in this role (linked image dates from July of that year), the year CMB lost the Hong Kong Island bus franchise.

NWFB did inherit a motley collection of Daimler/Leyland Fleetlines CMB had bought new however. Given their advancing age, tied with the 17-18 year age limit on franchised buses and the franchise's commitment to introduce legions of brand-new air-conditioned stock meant they were high on the withdrawal list. That said, some of the 30-foot SF-class (numbering 30 examples all told) were held back from withdrawal until short, low-height Duple Metsec-bodied Dennis Tridents arrived in 2000.

 

[Gag Halfrunt]

This is said to be a Fleetline, converted to left hand drive and rebodied, that operated in Shenzhen until 2008.

File:Double decker bus in Shekou, Shenzhen in 2006.jpg - Wikimedia Commons

commons.wikimedia.org

A double decker bus served on Route 226 in Shekou, Shenzhen. This bus was a renovation of a Daimler Fleetline and was called as "Great Eagle Jumbo" (巨鹰珍宝) by local bus fans. This type of bus was retired from SBG in 2008.

 

[Kremlin Stooge]

The Capital Transport-published London Transport Buses books, by Lawrie Bowles, provide a stark illustration of the decline and fall of LT‘s DMS empire. At the beginning of 1977, of the total order for 2646 vehicles some 450 were still to be delivered, 1913 vehicles scheduled for service, with a handful of early deliveries out of service though not officially withdrawn.

By February 1983 all 2646 had been delivered, 959 vehicles remained in stock of which 557 were scheduled for service. For comparison, at the same date there were 2096 Routemasters scheduled for service.

 

[Mikey C]

Thanks for the additional detail. It probably was Solent Blue Line I was thinking of, when associating the Fleetlines with Southern Vectis. With the passage of time it becomes more difficult to remember exactly who was doing what and where, in a very fluid, sometimes turbulent period in the history of the bus industry.

Adding to the mix of ‘post-London’ usage, we have Ensign, who quite liked a bit of short-term hire work alongside their disposal and re-sale business. South Wales Transport was one operator to run Fleetlines under this arrangement.

I wondered about Bexleybus too. Quite a smart cream livery with blue lining springs to mind.

The Bexleybus livery was blue and cream, but it certainly wasn't smart! It looked really cheap when compared to the quality of the London red paintwork

The DMSs weren't reliable and on the 96 which I sometimes used, were a major step down from the previous L class Olympians. They were replaced after a couple of years by Titans before Bexleybus lost all of its routes!

 

[Robertj21a]

The Bexleybus livery was blue and cream, but it certainly wasn't smart! It looked really cheap when compared to the quality of the London red paintwork

The DMSs weren't reliable and on the 96 which I sometimes used, were a major step down from the previous L class Olympians. They were replaced after a couple of years by Titans before Bexleybus lost all of its routes!

I think the Bexleybus livery was heavily influenced by Eastbourne (who I believe painted many of the DMS fleet).

 

[A0wen]

The Bexleybus livery was blue and cream, but it certainly wasn't smart! It looked really cheap when compared to the quality of the London red paintwork

The DMSs weren't reliable and on the 96 which I sometimes used, were a major step down from the previous L class Olympians. They were replaced after a couple of years by Titans before Bexleybus lost all of its routes!

I don't think it was any less smart than other liveries which were blue/cream such as Preston, WMPTE or Thamesdown.

The all over LT red could look quite drab, particularly on a vehicle with a slabby appearance like the DMS.

AIUI the whole Bexleybus operation was run on a shoestring and wasn't a success for London Buses generally, though they learned their lesson and did things differently for later such divisions. Not sure the problems with their Fleetlines was down to the vehicles.

 

[Kremlin Stooge]

The Bexleybus livery was blue and cream, but it certainly wasn't smart! It looked really cheap when compared to the quality of the London red paintwork

See my signature!

I think the Bexleybus livery was heavily influenced by Eastbourne (who I believe painted many of the DMS fleet).

Yes, that echoes with me as well.

I don't think it was any less smart than other liveries which were blue/cream such as Preston, WMPTE or Thamesdown.

The all over LT red could look quite drab, particularly on a vehicle with a slabby appearance like the DMS.

Agreed, though the topic of liveries is always going to be subjective. My personal preference on LT liveries was when the Fleetlines (and indeed the Metropolitans) had white paint around the upper-deck windows, which I felt helped to break up the slab-like effect.

 

[delt1c]

From a driver point of view, one of the worst things about the DMS was the constant rattle and noise from the ( unused ) automatic fare collector. When they converted some DM's to D's it was pure heaven not to have that noise on your left

 

[Mikey C]

See my signature!

Yes, that echoes with me as well.

Agreed, though the topic of liveries is always going to be subjective. My personal preference on LT liveries was when the Fleetlines (and indeed the Metropolitans) had white paint around the upper-deck windows, which I felt helped to break up the slab-like effect.

I agree that London buses of that era look better with a touch of contrast, whether white around the windows or a white stripe. I liked the final London Buses livery before privatisation, with the white stripe around the middle and grey skirt

Apart from the colour scheme, the Bexleybus logo was tacky looking too

Bexleybus Daimler Fleetline Class DMS DMS1580 THM580M at Bexleyheath in 1988 on route 229 - Jan-88 - Cliff Essex Collection

thetransportlibrary.co.uk

 

[Busaholic]

I don't think it was any less smart than other liveries which were blue/cream such as Preston, WMPTE or Thamesdown.

The all over LT red could look quite drab, particularly on a vehicle with a slabby appearance like the DMS.

AIUI the whole Bexleybus operation was run on a shoestring and wasn't a success for London Buses generally, though they learned their lesson and did things differently for later such divisions. Not sure the problems with their Fleetlines was down to the vehicles.

i agree with you about the Bexleybus livery. Imo the DMS actually looked better in this livery than the all-over red. I always thought that the LT experiment with white upper deck window surrounds on some of the earlier DMSs should have continued: those ones looked a lot better. I remember seeing a photo of one in later life with OK Motor Services, whose livery bore a distinct resemblance to the experimental London one, and that was the best-looking DMS I ever saw, albeit not in person.

 

[Robertj21a]

I agree that London buses of that era look better with a touch of contrast, whether white around the windows or a white stripe. I liked the final London Buses livery before privatisation, with the white stripe around the middle and grey skirt

Apart from the colour scheme, the Bexleybus logo was tacky looking too

Bexleybus Daimler Fleetline Class DMS DMS1580 THM580M at Bexleyheath in 1988 on route 229 - Jan-88 - Cliff Essex Collection

thetransportlibrary.co.uk

For a low cost operation I think that livery is perfectly ok.

 

[Kremlin Stooge]

I agree that London buses of that era look better with a touch of contrast, whether white around the windows or a white stripe. I liked the final London Buses livery before privatisation, with the white stripe around the middle and grey skirt

Apart from the colour scheme, the Bexleybus logo was tacky looking too

Bexleybus Daimler Fleetline Class DMS DMS1580 THM580M at Bexleyheath in 1988 on route 229 - Jan-88 - Cliff Essex Collection

thetransportlibrary.co.uk

Nothing wrong with that, possibly could benefit from a couple of tweaks, but fundamentally it’s a sound livery. I take it the National in the background carries the single-deck version?

...so anyone who wanted a low-height capable bus with Leyland engine could continue with the Fleetline.

Which was all well and good, until Leyland pulled the Fleetline from general market availability, to concentrate exclusively on production for London. This decision left a lot of formerly loyal Fleetline customers in the lurch, and angered a good deal of them.

 

[DunsBus]

The Capital Transport-published London Transport Buses books, by Lawrie Bowles, provide a stark illustration of the decline and fall of LT‘s DMS empire. At the beginning of 1977, of the total order for 2646 vehicles some 450 were still to be delivered, 1913 vehicles scheduled for service, with a handful of early deliveries out of service though not officially withdrawn.

By February 1983 all 2646 had been delivered, 959 vehicles remained in stock of which 557 were scheduled for service. For comparison, at the same date there were 2096 Routemasters scheduled for service.

Ironically, by the time DMS2646 was delivered in August 1978, DMS1248 - dating from 1972 - had already been withdrawn, having succumbed to an electrical fire a few weeks earlier.

 

[harz99]

Lots of comment on the DMS, and a few well informed posts relating to some of the reasons why LTs DM/S buses weren't as successful with LT as with other operator's, but not much from people who actually drove them in London service from the 70s.

So here goes as someone who did just that.

Leaving aside the variations in buses of the same designation, there were 3 main types, firstly as introduced the standard type with Gardner power, secondly the standard type with Leyland power and lastly the B20 type. I have driven all three types in regular service, both when brand new and when well worn, and from two garages where the routes operated were completely different to each other's, as were maintenance standards.

From these experiences it was obvious that as has been said the various mods LT insisted on doing to the Fleetline caused many more issues than they actually solved, for instance door interlock switches on the front doors were both not needed and counterproductive as not being able to open the doors for a clearer view at certain junctions was actually quite dangerous.

However other issues came from the standee loadings of up to an extra 19 people (officially) being put onto the bus when used for one man operation. On hilly routes with full loadings brake wear was atrocious, it not being unusual for handbrakes to need adjustment every other day or worse, at the same time on those same buses front axles were failing almost certainly partially because of weight transference under braking on hills when loaded.

So what to do, maybe change down to a lower gear descending hills? Well yes, but that also had it's problems because the gearbox coupling was another weak point, so if the drivers dropped down a gear without vastly reducing road speed below the maximum for that gear first...well that didn't help.

Funnily enough the wear and tear on two man DM vehicles operated over the same roads with less people on board was much less problematic.

Going back to design issues, what by the time these buses came out should have been an air/spring parking brake, was specified as an air assisted handbrake with a big bar lever sticking out of the floor to apply same, okay but if applied hard on a slope and left for a while they tended to end up jammed on and could only be released by a mechanic from underneath.

Another issue came from not having vent slots in the bonnet top - in hot weather 5 minutes on a bus stand frequently ended up with the overheating alarm screeching in your ear on restart, simply because of the heat build up and the sensor being mounted at the highest point on the engine - instructions were if alarm goes off stop engine and phone engineers (to avoid a potentially seized engine) which inevitably resulted in a 30-60 minute wait for a bus mechanic to turn up with 2 big watering cans and contents, plus the obligatory hammer and very large screwdriver of course. Remedy being empty water over sensor and engine, restart and of you go - until the next time.

I won't mention heating and demisting except to say both were inadequate, especially demisting when carrying up to 95 people as the buses were built, and got worse from lack of maintenance as the buses got older.

As to driving them, well in theory you could leave them in auto all day, in practice many gearboxes seemed to be set to change up to top at 17/18 mph which was far too slow a speed for that gear, lack of a kickdown or hold meant using the gear lever as a semi auto was the only way to achieve a reasonable progress, okay if the driver released the gas between changes not so if like many it was foot down all the time, and so yet more gearbox and transmission issues...

I found the cab seating and control layout to be satisfactory, no issues there thankfully.

Of the 3 types i mentioned my preference was for the B20 but I suspect that might simply have been due to them being newer and better maintained when I drove them at Brixton, the standard Leylands came second, and the Gardners last. The Gardners I drove were the later ones in the 2200 batch when new, the amount of engine vibration both when stationary and pulling away from rest was unpleasant, also they seemed to have a very narrow power delivery band giving a sort of "all or nothing" acceleration which momentarily hung on if you released the gas pedal. Later life experiences with LT Titan's and Bristol VRs were the same so I guess that is a Gardner characteristic.

So were the DMSs at fault or was it LT to blame? To my mind the bus itself was a decent tool for the job, ruined by LT with too many mods, and excessive expectations in terms of carrying capacity and garages maintenance capability. It didn't help that lessons that should have been learned from the XA/XMB/SM classes and their problems clearly weren't.

 

[83G/84D]

I don't think they had Rolls Royce engines - there were a couple fitted with RR Eagle engines, but it wasn't a widespread fitment.

There were the B20s - which were Leyland engined - that were allocated to Thornton Heath and Croydon and some of those subsequently received Iveco engines - could it be those you're thinking of ?

There’s no such thing as a silly question, an enquiring mind is a blessing!

In the timescale in question, the key difference between the two types was that the Fleetline was no longer made available for general sale by Leyland. If the Mods will permit a little bit of thread drift, this situation left traditional Fleetline operators who still favoured a Gardner-engined double-deck bus with the choice of the Bristol VR and... er, well, the Bristol VR. By this time however, many a fleet manager, who had their fingers burnt by the Leyland National, were less prepared to tolerate Leyland‘s somewhat peremptory approach to customers, arguably leading to a gap in the market that eventually became wide enough to drive a Dennis Dominator into, closely pursued by the Metrobus. In the fullness of time, I expect some historians will pinpoint this period as starting the countdown clock ticking towards Leyland’s eventual disappearance.

Yes, there was only a small handful of RR-engined DMSs. Fleet numbers I can trace are 1199 (KUC199P), 1968 (KUC968P), 2059 (KJD59P) - allocated to Chiswick works for experimentation purposes, and 2120 (KJD120P). Being distinctly non-standard, all were early casualties of the culling.

Only a very small number (approx 5 from memory) received Rolls Royce engines with DMS864 being the first.

The Iveco engine conversion was a Wandle District initiative with, I think, 200 buses being fitted in 1987-8

Just as an aside, this year is the 50th anniversary of the introduction of the first DMS which entered service on 2 January 1971. The last of them being withdrawn by LT/LBL in 1993.

DMS 864, DM 1199, DMS 1968, DMS 2059 & 2120 according to a piece of literature on the buses I have, had the Eagle engines. 1968 was also one of seven to receive two piece glider doors.

 

[Kremlin Stooge]

Lots of comment on the DMS, and a few well informed posts relating to some of the reasons why LTs DM/S buses weren't as successful with LT as with other operator's, but not much from people who actually drove them in London service from the 70s.

So here goes as someone who did just that.

Leaving aside the variations in buses of the same designation, there were 3 main types, firstly as introduced the standard type with Gardner power, secondly the standard type with Leyland power and lastly the B20 type. I have driven all three types in regular service, both when brand new and when well worn, and from two garages where the routes operated were completely different to each other's, as were maintenance standards.

From these experiences it was obvious that as has been said the various mods LT insisted on doing to the Fleetline caused many more issues than they actually solved, for instance door interlock switches on the front doors were both not needed and counterproductive as not being able to open the doors for a clearer view at certain junctions was actually quite dangerous.

However other issues came from the standee loadings of up to an extra 19 people (officially) being put onto the bus when used for one man operation. On hilly routes with full loadings brake wear was atrocious, it not being unusual for handbrakes to need adjustment every other day or worse, at the same time on those same buses front axles were failing almost certainly partially because of weight transference under braking on hills when loaded.

So what to do, maybe change down to a lower gear descending hills? Well yes, but that also had it's problems because the gearbox coupling was another weak point, so if the drivers dropped down a gear without vastly reducing road speed below the maximum for that gear first...well that didn't help.

Funnily enough the wear and tear on two man DM vehicles operated over the same roads with less people on board was much less problematic.

Going back to design issues, what by the time these buses came out should have been an air/spring parking brake, was specified as an air assisted handbrake with a big bar lever sticking out of the floor to apply same, okay but if applied hard on a slope and left for a while they tended to end up jammed on and could only be released by a mechanic from underneath.

Another issue came from not having vent slots in the bonnet top - in hot weather 5 minutes on a bus stand frequently ended up with the overheating alarm screeching in your ear on restart, simply because of the heat build up and the sensor being mounted at the highest point on the engine - instructions were if alarm goes off stop engine and phone engineers (to avoid a potentially seized engine) which inevitably resulted in a 30-60 minute wait for a bus mechanic to turn up with 2 big watering cans and contents, plus the obligatory hammer and very large screwdriver of course. Remedy being empty water over sensor and engine, restart and of you go - until the next time.

I won't mention heating and demisting except to say both were inadequate, especially demisting when carrying up to 95 people as the buses were built, and got worse from lack of maintenance as the buses got older.

As to driving them, well in theory you could leave them in auto all day, in practice many gearboxes seemed to be set to change up to top at 17/18 mph which was far too slow a speed for that gear, lack of a kickdown or hold meant using the gear lever as a semi auto was the only way to achieve a reasonable progress, okay if the driver released the gas between changes not so if like many it was foot down all the time, and so yet more gearbox and transmission issues...

I found the cab seating and control layout to be satisfactory, no issues there thankfully.

Of the 3 types i mentioned my preference was for the B20 but I suspect that might simply have been due to them being newer and better maintained when I drove them at Brixton, the standard Leylands came second, and the Gardners last. The Gardners I drove were the later ones in the 2200 batch when new, the amount of engine vibration both when stationary and pulling away from rest was unpleasant, also they seemed to have a very narrow power delivery band giving a sort of "all or nothing" acceleration which momentarily hung on if you released the gas pedal. Later life experiences with LT Titan's and Bristol VRs were the same so I guess that is a Gardner characteristic.

So were the DMSs at fault or was it LT to blame? To my mind the bus itself was a decent tool for the job, ruined by LT with too many mods, and excessive expectations in terms of carrying capacity and garages maintenance capability. It didn't help that lessons that should have been learned from the XA/XMB/SM classes and their problems clearly weren't.

Fascinating post, thanks for taking the time to write it all out.

 

[jammy36]

Fascinating post, thanks for taking the time to write it all out.

Seconded, really great insight.

 

[F262YTJ]

Does anyone know what the different classifications of D, DM and DMS of the LT Fleetlines meant?

Also Merseyside PTE were due a large batch of Fleetlines in the mid/late 1970s but these were changed in favour of the Atlantean because of supply issues with Leyland.

 

[Richard Scott]

Does anyone know what the different classifications of D, DM and DMS of the LT Fleetlines meant?

Also Merseyside PTE were due a large batch of Fleetlines in the mid/late 1970s but these were changed in favour of the Atlantean because of supply issues with Leyland.

D I believe was a DM modified for driver only operation, DM was one used on routes with a conductor and DMS (where S stood for standee) was a driver only operated bus from new. I got into buses whilst at university at Uxbridge and whilst living out for a couple of years our local route was the 90, which was tendered, believe to London Buslines? Mostly worked by G reg Olympians but occasionally a DMS would turn up. Think they were mostly M or N reg buses and they had about 7 of them always enjoyed a trip on them. I then realised my old school bus must have been an old DMS, was THM548N, if I remember correctly run by Castleways of Winchcombe, maybe someone could confirm?

 

[carlberry]

Does anyone know what the different classifications of D, DM and DMS of the LT Fleetlines meant?

Also Merseyside PTE were due a large batch of Fleetlines in the mid/late 1970s but these were changed in favour of the Atlantean because of supply issues with Leyland.

DMS was One Man operated (Daimler Single) and DM was the crew version. I believe D was a later modification that could be either.

 

[F262YTJ]

Thanks for that

 

[MotCO]

I believe D was a later modification that could be either.

Shortly after, or at about the same time, buses tended to have single letter designations - e.g. M (Metrobus), T (Titan), L (Olympian).

Seconded, really great insight.

Thirded!