LETTERS TO 'OMNIBUS' (1) - RESTRICTIVE PRACTICE
Dear Sir,
I very much enjoyed Stan Letts account his driving days at Dudley Garage (Omnibus No.143), in particular his experience with 3190 (MOF190) and the subsequent reaction received from the Garage Union Officials on his return to depot.
This reminded me of my own memory of an incident at the nearby Hartshill Garage in 1979 where I was employed as a part time driver at weekends by W.M.P.T.E. working evening shifts. On this one Sunday night I was allocated a duty on the popular D & S 245/6 Stourbridge to Wednesbury that the garage shared with Stourbridge based vehicles. The usual buses used on this run on a Sunday were new Fleetlines from the 63xx and 64xx batch. We had at Hartshill an elderly ex B.M.M.O. Fleetline D11 5255 (5255HA) one of only six survivors with the Company in 1979 and it was usually buried at the back of the yard at weekends out of use.
During my break I asked the engineers if it could be retrieved from its resting place and if I could use it for the latter part of my duty. They were somewhat puzzled by this request but readily agreed and after much shunting it was soon being driven out of the garage into position on the main road towards Dudley. Within a few minutes my allocated bus 6491 arrived from Stourbridge direction showing 245 Wednesbury via Dudley and after a loud request from the engineers the passengers were asked to leave the comfort of their seats and transfer to the elderly bus parked in front.
We were soon on our way climbing up towards Dudley town centre and the bus behaved impeccably well and I thoroughly enjoyed the driving experience with 5255, which was in the twilight of its service. However, like Stan, on my return to Garage at 11.30pm I was met my a deputation from the Union to be told in no uncertain terms that I had no right to be driving this bus on a Sunday. The Union apparently had an agreement that it would only be used for school services and those only ran on weekdays. Not long after 5255 was withdrawn and taken to Adderley Street for disposal.
It was a long time before I requested a particular bus again but I do remember asking the Dudley engineers if I could nave Fleetline 4613 on the night staff bus duty instead of a National but that’s another story.
Roger Hodson
Bournville, Birmingham
LETTERS TO 'OMNIBUS' (2) - RESTORATION POLICY
Dear Sir,
I was very interested to read the Restoration Policy document circulated recently and should like to offer some comments.
The statement on the core collection seems to me about right. The Museum must concentrate on Midland Red and operators local to the Birmingham area. As an East Midlander I am not sure where Harper Bros fits in but I am clear that a Barton PD1 however interesting is outside the Museum’s main remit.
The operating fleet should reflect the core collection and have public and educational appeal. My observations suggest that Joe and Joanne Public only regard a bus as old if it has a bonnet or a half cab. To him or her, a 1960s Fleetline or VR appears no different to the buses they see and ride on daily. Sadly in some cases the perception may be correct! Bonneted and half-cab buses also offer more hiring opportunities. I was surprised that the S16 was allowed to parade as Bertie the Bus.
Following the above comments, I suggest that money should not be spent repainting the Southport open top and it be replaced by the D9 open top as soon as possible. GHA337 should be completed and tested to Class 6. Its appeal to the public would be enormous and as a Midland Red pre-war half-cab saloon it is far more important than any other vehicle mentioned in the list of Class 6 aspirations.
I suggest that FFY402, RC4615 and KFM775 are outside the stated core collection and resources should be directed elsewhere. The same might apply to WDF569 but I am not sure where the Soudley Valley is.
The RT, RM, RF, PD3, VRT and RE listed under “Other Bus and Coach Exhibits” will never be part of the core collection and are types well represented in other museums or private collections. The trust should not in my view spend any of its resources on these vehicles.
I trust that my comments will contribute to a debate on the future of BaMMOT.
They are not intended as any criticism of the Trustees who deserve credit for publishing the paper but resources are scarce and need to be clearly focussed.
Tony King
Capel St.Mary, Ipswich
Malcolm Keeley replies for the Trustees:-
Tony kindly confirms that his surprise over the S16 as Bertie relates not to our hiring it but its acceptability to the users.
Tony's letter raises a number of issues that other members may wish to respond to and a few points may be useful.
Restricting the Museum rigidly to the West Midlands would reduce variety and mean, for example, no representation of the contributions to bus development by AEC after 1931 (often in partnership with London Transport) and Bristol.
Having an outer ring of less intensive representation, stretching from Nottingham to Cheltenham, helps in this respect but you may disagree.
Other factors to bear in mind are:
The limited availability of SOS/BMMO spares.
The vehicles unpaid volunteers wish to work on.
Donors may contribute very generously to the restoration of certain vehicles.
Past (and future) donors of vehicles accepted into the BaMMOT collection need to have the assurance that, whilst the emphasis will move from time to time to meet certain needs such as anniversaries, all our exhibits will be regarded equally over a period of time.
Chapel Lane, Wythall, Worcs B47 6JX
Tel : 01564 826471 e-mail us
A registered educational charity no 507191
