Towards the standard bus
Page 24
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
by Martin Hayes
• The announcement today of the Volvo-Camair brings to three the number of integral-construction vehicles on the British bus market. It is these vehicles and not the ineffective Government bus grant specification which are at last introducing a measure of standardization to the British psv world.
The three models announced so far — the Volvo, the Metro-Scania and the Leyland National — are only the first signs of the switch to integrals which will eventually sweep through the British bus world. Next on the scene will be yet another highly respected foreign manufacturer and it may 6e only a short time before one of the British "mass producers" currently associated with the lighter end of the chassis market enters the field.
One thing is certain about the integral trend: the design, development and initial production costs of the concept make it essential that variations on the single-deck designs — to include double deckers and coaches.— cannot be long delayed. What certain operators might justifiably ask is why manufacturers have opted to produce single-deckers first when there is a vast unfulfilled demand for double-deckers.
One of the most interesting features of the next few years should be the battle to make integrals acceptable to the majority of British operators. It may well be that they are eventually forced on the industry through lack of a ready alternative.
The problem with the integral concept is that, though few managers would deny its inherent strength, it really means virtual standardization. Although all three of the manufacturers presently involved in integrals have made special efforts to leave as large a number of options available to the customer as possible, there can be no amendments to basic construction procedure. For far too long British operators have been used to making vast numbers of changes to standard vehicle specification. Not only this, they have chopped and changed every few years. This will now have to stop.
Lest it be thought that I am putting the manufacturers' case too strongly, it is important to recall that some specifications they have offered in the past have been inadequate. In producing their latest designs, however, all manufacturers have called for operator opinion at a very early stage. Even more telling is the unimpeachable argument that standardization means lower costs in manufacture, spare parts and labour.
However, although many operators will find integrals forming the basis of their future fleets, there are those who for genuine reasons cannot accept a bus of standardized dimensions. In rural areas like Devon, for example, lira-long vehicles 8ft 2-i-in.-wide cannot be used. In catering for this substantial minority one or two of the smaller manufacturers should find a thriving market for their intentionally nonstandard vehicles.
It would be a tragedy if the gloomy predictions of some interested parties about the future of integrals came to pass. Though this is doubtless heresy to the enthusiasts, the policy of complex and ever-changing specifications must be accepted as a romantic anachronism. The products of such thinking can no longer make financial sense, whereas the standardized integral bus, which can be built with far less expensive labour, can bring positive savings. Is there any undertaking which can honestly afford to turn its back on these?