AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Time for the City Liner

16th July 1965, Page 73
16th July 1965
Page 73
Page 75
Page 73, 16th July 1965 — Time for the City Liner
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

BY DEREK MOSES

A semi-diagrammatic map illustrating the proposed central zone into which existing central " red" bus routes would cease to operate. Coy liners would operate at frequent intervals on a limited number of trunk routes inside the zone. Passengers would wait in properly designed shelters, and world be able to board the .first rchicle to arrive. changing to another bus at any convenieht point in order to reach the required destination. Tickets would be available for at least one transfer within the special zone. Under this system the multiplicity of bus stops and bus routes operating along streets such as 0.0)rd Street would be eliminated. City liners would depart at frequent intervals throughout the day, on the set routes, and surface passenger communication in the central area would be greatly simplified. .A modified Green Line network would he retained so that the limited manlier of per.* whit do want to travel from, say, Guildford to Hertford, could still do so. The majority of passengers would transfer from the normal double-decker bus (preferably of rear-engit,ed, kohl-entrance layout)orfrom the main line station to a city liner at a suitable bus .qatimi to reach their destination inside the zone. Most of the main line railway termini are itulicateel on the map, and all are lettered BR; Charing Cross station should be easily idem /liable, as also Holborn Viaduct and Black friars (north of the river above Waterloo), Cannon Street above London Bridge, and Fenchurch

Street near the Minoiie,N ii us station.

"Monday is 'D Day '. From that dav all existing London bus services crossing the central zone of the city will be cut out and terminate near main line stations or special bus parks taken over from existing car parks. New services of fast buses running at frequent intervals will run along special routes, linking the termini with most of the important points inside the zone. The entry of cars into this central zone will be severely limited, only people with special permits being allowed to park inside this area during peak hours. Through traffic for cars and goods vehicles will be restricted to special routes or sections of roads, which will be entirely segregated from the busways." .

NO, it has not happened yet. Yes, it could be a bad dream or even a good dream, whichever way you look at it. But it could happen, and one might add should happen. And from Mr. Tom Fraser's statement in the Commons on June 23, it might happen quicker than we all expect. We must be sure, however, that we are not putting the cart before the horse, that, in fact, we have the right types of buses, the right type of services, and most important of all, sufficient bus crews to man the services on to which the people entering London each day by car may be "persuaded" to transfer. Last year car passengers amounted to lesS than one-third of the total

road passengers, but accounted for more than two-thirds of the vehicles. At the same time buses and coaches carried more than 60 per cent of the passengers but represented only about 5 per cent of the total vehicles.

The statement by Mr. Fraser already referred to was probably the strongest hint so far that something fairly drastic may be going to happen. After announcing that LTB fares would be "frozen" for the rest of the year, he went on to promise that a full inquiry would be made into the whole problem facing London Transport. And the inquiry would cover the possibility of even more extensive traffic management measures and also other methods of restraint of traffic.

Special bus lanes and segregated routes for other traffic have all been hinted at, but I feel that it may be a little premature to introduce all this in the immediate future. I do wish something could be done right now, but I feel that LTB operates neither the right type of service nor the right type of bus for that service in the central zone. To try and divert existing cross-London bus services along particular routes through the centre could be a disastrous mistake. Because, quite frankly, I do not think the standard of service could be much improved.

To begin with, the buses required to operate at higher average speeds along these " fast " routes would be stuck in the " gluepot ring of the outer suburbs, to borrow a phrase from Mr. F. J. Lloyd—and what a descriptive phrase of present day conditions. But to wait until things can be improved in the suburbs as well could be a long wait, and a massive operation would be needed.

The solution might be to draw a ring roughly linking the main line stations from Liverpool Street in the east and Paddington in the west with Kings Cross in the north and Waterloo south of the river and, as already hinted, terminate the existing bus services at convenient interchange points on the perimeter of the circle thus formed. Inside this circle introduce frequent services of largecapacity buses of completely new design, and in a livery which has never been seen in London before. A request for buses of a suitable type has already been made by Mr. Hubert Perring, chief mechanical engineer. Ministry of Transport (The Commercial Motor, April 24, 1964) and I would also refer readers to the issue of May 29, 1964 in which I incorporated many of Mr. Perring's ideas in a specially designed 102-passenger double-decker. The possibilities of such buses, with comments from some men of the industry and from Mr. Perring himself were further discussed in this journal on August 14, 1964.

Double-decker Re-designed

There are still no signs of any buses of this type entering service anywhere in this country, even though the Ministry of Transport has now made it legally possible. Sweden, in fact, might well show the way with its 36 ft.-long Atlantean double-deckers (The Commercial Motor. June 11, 1965). Since my original exercise I have altered the doubledecker bus layout to make it even more practical. mechanically at least, while incidentally improving the arrangements for passenger circulation at the rear of the bus.

The design, reproduced here, employs virtually the existing Cummins V6 engine and transmission line of the Daimler Roadliner, offset to the nearside to allow the fitting of a rear staircase, and set slightly lower. This necessitates raising the floor-line and consequently the overall height of the bus and employing shallow steps at the rear doors but from the point of view of passenger circulating space and adaptability to one-way traffic systems the finished product is, I maintain, an ideal bus for the type of service suggested.

No doubt there will be those who say that such a bus is impracticable, or even impossible, even with integral construction employing aluminium alloy framing to reduce the weight. At the moment there are no tyres available to fit the small wheels required and carry the load -but they could be well on the way. There can be no excuse, however, for not introducing the alternative design I have reproduced.

This latter single-decker is an immediate possibility as there is already an existing chassis design which easily could be adapted for the purpose. It is, in fact, a perfectly orthodox Daimler Roadliner with the front axle set back 6 in. to facilitate the fitting of a wider entrance for easy passenger entry from each side of the bus. To transfer the driving position to the centreline is a straightforward job. And a bus which can load and unload on either side, like a tube car, is essential to fit the one-way streets of the modern traffic system.

I have reproduced drawings of the proposed bus, which I feel ought to be considered by the officials responsible for operating in the larger provincial cities as well as London. The drawings should be fairly self explanatory, but a few notes might help. The bus is designed on the " standee " principle, but how about naming it "city liner" to get away from the former rather offensive word? The forward saloon seats 10 passengers, with room for (at least) 38 standing passengers, and one of the wheel-arch boxes devoted to luggage space. The rear saloon—that is, the section immediately aft of the _exit—seats 19 passengers, and leaves room for a further 10 standing passengers in the wide gangway. Passenger capacity could be increased to 80, however, without contravening existing regulations.

Roadliner Designed for the Job' The Roadliner was chosen out of the available rearengined single-decker chassis of today because of its low frame throughout, allowing the fitting of a completely horizontal floor in the main standing saloon. Furthermore, no exit steps are required—again compare the tube car. Headroom in the standing saloon is about 7 ft.—equivalent to that of the modern Piccadilly car, so claustrophobia should be avoided. The only slight drawback is a shallow step in line with the rear of the exit, followed by a slightly ramped floor. This is the slight penalty for having a flat floor in the main saloon, but can be avoided if a slightly sloping floor is acceptable in this portion, though steeper ramps or shallow steps would be required at the exit.

With an attractive modern decor, very comfortable seats, full air conditioning (London does experience extremes of heat and cold), and allowing for the ample space to move about, I think "city liner" is anything but a presumptions title—and how much more agreeable than "standee bus ". Fitting some seats in the main saloon (especially 'comfortable ones) is psychologically far superior to the LTB idea of fitting seats in the rear portion only.

The map (page 71) outlines the special zone I have chosen for the new system, and approximate bus routes within it are indicated. Passengers from the suburbs wishing to travel on the surface in central London could thgn transfer to one of the new high-capacity buses. Bus stops along the routes should be rather more widely spaced, to allow faster average speeds, and there should be a new ticket system, including the use of a flat fare of, say, one shilling. At major stops ticket issuing machines could be employed, in conjunction with ticket cancelling machines on the vehicles, and passengers should be allowed one transfer to another bus on the city liner rout4s within one hour of issue of ticket.

What of staffing problems? The single-deckers, at least, would be one-man operated, but the freedom from congestion following the separation of buses from other traffic, and the more economical use of the units themselves would allow more work to be done by fewer crews. If London generally could only free buses from the congestion of today (as the Board knows only too well) it would possibly find itself with more crews and buses than needed to operate the existing services. Far from this creating redundancy, it would give the LTB an excellent opportunity to improve facilities in the suburbs, which are sadly lacking in some quarters. and generally need streamlining.

I firmly believe that all the above is not "pie in the sky ". It is high time the existing spider's web of London bus routes was scrapped. and a more streamlined system introduced. And as for the special bus designs, the sad news about Weymanns (The Commercial Motor, July 2) means there will soon be an emoty factory and staff available which could be requisitioned to build the buses required.

Tags

Organisations: Ministry of Transport
Locations: London

comments powered by Disqus