IN YOUR OPINION
Page 69
Page 70
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Design of Bus Bodies
I HAVE just completed perusing the papers read at your Fleet Management Conference, as reported in your issue of September 25, and I would like to make a few comments about current bus body designs.
Mr. Vince, in his paper, pointed out that the main criterion to be considered in the design of a bus body is that of passenger comfort—mainly leg room, seat comfort, and heating and ventilating:
The lack of leg room in buses is legend. This fault even arises in coaches. I, personally, can think of six different coachbuilders' products in which my knees touch the back of the seat in front, and I am only 5 ft. 11 in. tall.
The design of seats is almost random in its variation. In some buses, the weight of the passenger's body is carried on the thigh, not the buttocks. The correct angle for seat cushions is dependent on the height of the seat above the floor.
Heating and ventilation have been improved over the years, if only slightly, but many operators do not utilize their heating systems properly. Many buses run with their radiators unmasked; or only partially masked, throughout the winter. On one three-hour journey last December, in a bus that had been in service for only six months, the windows )emained frozen on the inside for the entire trip. The ambient temperature was approximately 20°F., and the bus was fitted with two heaters in each saloon. Need I add that the radiator was completely unmasked? Ventilation, though improved, is still inadequate. On days
when the relative humidity is high, condensation streams from the windows, and sometimes drops from the roof.
Though these criticisms are aimed at double-deckers rather than single-deckers or coaches, the latter are not entirely blameless. Again, there are fleets where these matters are being dealt with, but there are too many in which they are being ignored. If operators are to halt the drift of passengers away from their fleets to private transport they must provide comfortable seats with adequate leg room, forced ventilation and heating systems free from draughts—and sufficient luggage accommodation to meet the needs of their specific routes.
Adequate leg room can be provided only by reducing the number of seats. For a 30-ft. half-cab double-decker, I would suggest a seating capacity of 66 to 68, with semi coach type seats for longer journeys. Condensation on side windows could be reduced by composite glazing, such as two thin layers of glass sandwiching a layer of transparent insulator. If the heating system is designed to use waste heat from the engine, then the engine temperature must be controlled, preferably around a mean of about 190°F.
In general, luggage accommodation in single-deckers and coaches is adequate, but not so in front-entrance double deckers. The present under-stair compartments are small
and difficult to use. By lengthening the stair run along the side of the vehicle, more luggage space would be made
available, but at the cost of a more dangerous stairway, so this is not a wise solution. The space behind and below the back seat of front-entrance, half-cab double-deckers could be utilized, provided the emergency door were fitted to the off-side of the bus. If the rear seats were mounted on a raised platform, this compartment could be as large as 16 cu. ft. With rear-engined chassis the problem is not so simple. One answer is to use any apertures under bench seats where these overlap wheel arches. Another, which of course reduces seating capacity, is to fit a luggage rack above the front-wheel arch not covered by the stairway; such a rack could be tailored to suit passenger flow.
Buses built to these standards would be more expensive than those being purchased by many operators at present.
I think it would be fair to say that the fleets which are in most urgent need of improved buses are those where there is plenty of room for improved operating techniques.
Kilmacolm, R en frewshi re. JAMES M. WATSON.
An inexplicable Anomaly 9 I FOUND the article by F. K. Moses in the October 16 I issue, relating to the problems of Sunderland Corporation Transport on the inability to obtain Gardner-powered, lightweight, single-deck buses, to be very thought provoking. On the face of it the anomaly does seem inexplicable. Or does it?
About a decade ago there was a wholesale swing (which had been instigated by operators generally) to lighter weight, single-deck passenger models. The outcome of this policy was to leave the field clear, for all practical purposes, to two manufacturers, each producing its own design of power unit—Leyland, with its 5-76-litre unit for the Tiger Cub, and A.E.C. with its 6-75or 7-68-litre unit for the Reliance.
One of the most significant points about these units was that the power produced was developed over a wider speed range, the maximum speeds being something like 250-450 r.p.m. higher than, say, a Gardner 5LW engine. It is quite reasonable to suppose that this latter unit could have been utilized in a similar chassis to the Reliance or Tiger Cub, except for one important factor: this being the necessity for good performance with due regard to acceleration and speed. Bearing in mind that traffic congestion was beginning to have a serious effect 10 years ago, it was seemingly obvious that a new standard of performance with economy was required.
The Guy concern did attempt to cater for the lighter weight trend, as Mr. Moses did mention, but just before its withdrawal from the scene it attempted to interest operators in the four-cylinder, horizontal type of Meadows engine; and although a six-cylinder unit would have been preferable in terms of smoothness, the former incorporated some form of balancing mechanism which was claimed to give smoother running characteristics. So it would appear that Guy was in quest of an alternative to the Gardner in order to compete with the two established models by A.E.C. and Leyland. it would be wrong to claim that the Reliance and Tiger Cub have been perfect machines, as both have.their shortcomings; but the fact remains that both filled the gap for which they were intended.
At the present time Sunderland's outlook for the future would appear to be bleak, as although maximum gross weights and lengths have increased for passenger vehicles, the trend has been for A.E.C. and Leyland to uprate their larger power units to give a wider output and speed range. Gardner, on the other hand, holds doggedly to somewhat antiquated speed range figures. Could it be that the .concern fears the loss of .its most prized reputation—the legendary Gardner economy? If it does eventually come into line with contemporary standards, it will be interesting to see whether the tendency will be for Daimler or Guy to take the initiative to attack the Leyland group monopoly.
Sheffield 5. K. BEEDEN.