Jump to content

ERMT-1 - Extended Routemaster Trolleybus (Version 1)


Recommended Posts

Thanks for your reference. I completely understand your point now regarding the bulkhead/electrical gear. If I made the side window a full opening window, then I assume that it would be plausible to have a lid that lifts up towards the drivers side of the cab? This enabling access to the electrical gear? Is that a good solution? A door on that side is now out of the question. Just another thing. The electrical gear that is shown on the diagram doesn't seem to take up that much room and it's set high up. So does that mean there is still lots of dead space? I'm sure there wouldn't be any dead space, especially when all space is used in the rest of the vehicle?

David

The opening side window and lift up cover would be excellent solutions but be aware that the cover went all the way to the floor. Some departments specified an opening top and partial front hinged from the front so the top and the part of the front folded forward. Others had a two piece solution where the top and the whole of the front panel came off in two pieces. The space wasn't dead as such. Maintenance needed space to work, especially if a fix was required at the roadside and then there is the question of having enough air around the components to dissipate heat.

Many operators which didn't specify a nearside door to the compartment had the whole window hinged to open. They also had small sliding window to ventilate the cab. Many nearside photos of trolleybuses don't clearly show the opening window, you have to look closely for handles and hinges (!) and it was almost invariably the rearmost of the two cab windows. Some operators (including LT) didn't have any opening on the nearside much to the chagrin of the maintenance crews. You have the chance to ease a great deal of backache!

One other point you should take into account is the effect of water and dirt from the trolley poles ending up on the roof. This was particularly a problem around the rear dome but London had dark roofs from the rear of the first upper deck bay rearwards. I don't know how you'll match the colour but reference to David Bradley's site might help. http://www.trolleybus.net/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The radiator is unnecessary on a trolleybus. As the electrical equipment was quite compact (and heavy!) on most trolleybuses it was placed low down at the front where the radiator of a diesel bus would be as can be seen in many of the trollybus photos. I would suggest lowering the height of the radiator grill so that the top forms a continuous line with the top of the headlamp surrounds and replacing the grill with a plain panel with louvres. Another point is that the driver would need to see the nearside kerb a lot easier, many later trolleybuses had deeper windscreens which would require reducing the height of the radiator. A 'knee light' window below the nearside cab window might be an idea. As you must now have 'half' a Routemaster left are you going to acquire another kit and build another trolleybus?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The radiator is unnecessary on a trolleybus. As the electrical equipment was quite compact (and heavy!) on most trolleybuses it was placed low down at the front where the radiator of a diesel bus would be as can be seen in many of the trollybus photos. I would suggest lowering the height of the radiator grill so that the top forms a continuous line with the top of the headlamp surrounds and replacing the grill with a plain panel with louvres. Another point is that the driver would need to see the nearside kerb a lot easier, many later trolleybuses had deeper windscreens which would require reducing the height of the radiator. A 'knee light' window below the nearside cab window might be an idea. As you must now have 'half' a Routemaster left are you going to acquire another kit and build another trolleybus?

Inhabiting the world of "whatifery" as we are, the radiator moulding and grille could stay. Behind it could be a couple of fans to pull in air to cool equipment and to supply air for the heating system. The grille and surround would be a design feature of the Routemaster brand.

As far as kerbside visibility is concerned, the trolleybus with a full width front had an advantage over motor buses, especially those with "new look" fronts where the width of any, possibly vestigal, mudguard was difficult to judge. Thus the addition of those little aerial like stalks with a round knob on the top as seen on vehicles of a number of fleets. In a full fronted vehicle the front corner pillar gives an excellent idea of the position of the vehicle in relationship to the kerb. A knee window is a good idea for seeing cyclists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really appreciate all the advice and comments on my trolleybus, but it's all getting very technical now :-) I have much thinking to do. The one thing i'm still thinking about though is the spats. After all they are a very visible feature.

I guess it's a case of "Watch this space" and see what happens

Thanks again

David

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's great watching this all come together it really is looking good :gobsmacked: I have to say I like the spats, have you thought about decals yet will you be adding the Trolleybus bullseye to the lower deck rear window?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Morning folks

Will be adding a few more images later today. I haven't done much really, but the spats have gone and the roof area has been updated. Will be spending some more time on the cab area this weekend.

David.

p.s. does look better without the spats, so thanks for all your comments regarding that area of the bus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello again folks.

Well I have done a little bit more to my ERMT. The Spats are gone for good. The black around the arches is temporary just to give you an idea of how she will look when painted (black over red). I still have lots of sanding and smoothing off to do. The roof details have been revised and look more authentic. I'm no expert, but did go on some images I found in books and the net. The nose has a release panel now. This panel is accessible to the maintenance crew, with a lift up cover inside so that they can get to the electrical panel in the bulkhead. I was going to go for an outside opening panel and window, but I thought this was easier and still just as feasible. I have done the lower seating panels and bench seating. Again this is taped in place to give you an idea of the layout. I think the rest of the build will be relatively easy now compared to what I have already done. Hope you enjoy the latest images...

David.

rf87o7030.jpg

rf87o7031.jpg

rf87o7033.jpg

Still plenty more detailing to do here. The springs for the poles need to be added, plus a few other bits

rf87o7029.jpg

rf87o7036.jpg

rf87o7038.jpg

Loads of sanding and smoothing to be done here. I had a problem with some lost detail, so I just filled it and will smooth it off. Will look just right when done.

rf87o7034.jpg

rf87o7027.jpg

rf87o7026.jpg

rf87o7020.jpg

rf87o7019.jpg

rf87o7025.jpg

Edited by Model69
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's great watching this all come together it really is looking good :gobsmacked: I have to say I like the spats, have you thought about decals yet will you be adding the Trolleybus bullseye to the lower deck rear window?

Just realized I hadn't answered your question. The answer is yes regarding the trolleybus symbol. Will be on the rear window and also the front blanking panel were the radiator would normally be. I was so unsure about the spats, but to be honest, after removing them I do like the look. I did think that maintenance was a crucial factor, so they had to go.

Thanks for your interest in my build.

David.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Growing up in Tottenham I used to love Trolleybuses. I always hoped for one with the spats to come along so I could ride on that. The routes were 629 and 653( amazing what sticks in your mind) Dont forget when detailing you will need a long tube running along the underneath the bus from the rear to house the pole with th hook on. That is for the conductor to catch the overhead poles when they came off the wires(a regular thing at Tottenhan High Road and Bruce Grove Junction when the Conductor was too slow to lean out and pull the lever to change the points. That provided me with quite a bit of entertainment watching him trying to snare them with a 20 foot pole)

BTW I am old enough(67) to remember riding on Trams in London did they shake and make a noise unlike the smooth Trolleybus.

Good luck with your excellent build.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here are some images of my piecing together. When decks are cut to length and taped together, they slide in place quite easy. If you building other routemaster varients. You must keep all your leftover plastic. Comes in very handy indeed. Taping together is really important. Can't stress this enough. Now I am satisfied that everything fits ok. The seats i'm not worried aboout. They will fit just fine. The rear panel is a bar stool to fit. had to do some cutting and shaving to make sure the panels met. Make sure the staircase lines up with the upper floor panel.

1.

ryerwt001.jpg

2.

ryerwt002.jpg

3.

ryerwt004.jpg

4.

ryerwt007.jpg

5.

ryerwt008.jpg

6.

ryerwt010.jpg

7.

ryerwt011.jpg

8.

ryerwt013.jpg

9.

ryerwt015.jpg

10.

ryerwt016.jpg

11.

ryerwt017.jpg

12.

ryerwt018.jpg

13.

ryerwt019.jpg

14.

ryerwt020.jpg

15.

ryerwt022.jpg

16.

ryerwt026.jpg

17.

ryerwt027.jpg

18.

ryerwt028.jpg

19.

ryerwt030.jpg

20.

ryerwt031.jpg

21. Remember to slot the rinterior roof panel in before taping up....unlike what I did :-) Had to improvise

ryerwt032.jpg

22.

Edited by Model69
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is looking really good but I'm going to have to get technical again for, even in the world of "whatifery" you need to get the power from the poles to the motor.

If you look at most trolleybus bodies you will notice that the window pillars are just like those on a motorbus EXCEPT for those under the roof area where the electrical gear was placed. At that point the pillars are thicker. There were variations - some London trolleys had just one thick pillar and not always under the gear. The Leyland 1930s multi entrance trolley seen earlier in the thread took the power down through the front of the body using the pillar between the top deck front windows.

You have chosen to represent something that looks like typical roof gear from the 1930s/40s compared to the much less heavy looking equipment that was available by the mid 1950s. That's not a problem, Chiswick was contrarily remarkably conservative in some ways considering the advances it made with bus design from the RT onwards.

The problem you have is the RM was chassis less and the body was an integral design with the strength in the body. Every change that the design underwent used standard components from the original production design, placed wherever they were required, with the exception of the midships small bay on the RML which was later used for the small bays on the FRM. Now you need a solution to transmit the power without using thicker pillars.

At the time the RM was undergoing development, Manchester was replacing its prewar trolleybuses and ordered some rather elegant bodies from Burlingham which did not look to have the thicker pillars below the electrical gear.

The cables still ran down the relevant pillars but in neat boxes which intruded slightly into the passenger space so, rather than thickening the pillar along the length of the bus, the pillar was a few inches thicker across the internal width and the seats were arranged so seat backs butted onto the intruding pillars.

With regard to badges, whatever you put on the triangle, your single wheel hubs should carry the BUT symbol. By the mid 1950s British United Traction, formed in 1946 by AEC and Leyland, produced trolleybuses ordered from fleets that would have ordered from either. The Q1s were BUT products. The standard product by 1955 was based on the AEC Regent chassis but carried BUT badges and it is certain that the running units for any Routemaster trolley would have been BUT produced.

The only quibble I'd then have about this magnificent piece of inventive modelling is the use of double rear wheels on each rear axle. Is it too late to use your spare front wheels on the trailing axle, thus representing an undriven, steerable axle?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

More shots of the cab construction. There is loads of work to do here before I even think of doing any priming. The nose and front/side paneling needed more filler for shaping. This is taking ages, but it has to look right. The shots further along are just some comparisons between the Trolleybus and the RM. The standard of finish will be just the same as my RM....I hope....

Hope you enjoy the images. Please feel free to comment on images. I've numbered them for reference if you need to know anything about any particular shot.

Thanks

David.

1.

ryerwt033.jpg

2.

ryerwt034.jpg

3.

ryerwt035.jpg

4.

ryerwt036.jpg

5.

ryerwt037.jpg

6.

ryerwt038.jpg

7.

ryerwt039.jpg

8.

ryerwt040.jpg

9.

ryerwt042.jpg

10.

ryerwt043.jpg

11.

ryerwt044.jpg

12.

ryerwt045.jpg

13.

ryerwt054.jpg

14.

ryerwt056.jpg

15.

ryerwt057.jpg

16.

ryerwt058.jpg

17.

ryerwt059.jpg

18.

ryerwt060.jpg

19.

ryerwt061.jpg

20.

ryerwt062.jpg

21.

ryerwt063.jpg

22.

ryerwt064.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is looking really good but I'm going to have to get technical again for, even in the world of "whatifery" you need to get the power from the poles to the motor.

If you look at most trolleybus bodies you will notice that the window pillars are just like those on a motorbus EXCEPT for those under the roof area where the electrical gear was placed. At that point the pillars are thicker. There were variations - some London trolleys had just one thick pillar and not always under the gear. The Leyland 1930s multi entrance trolley seen earlier in the thread took the power down through the front of the body using the pillar between the top deck front windows.

You have chosen to represent something that looks like typical roof gear from the 1930s/40s compared to the much less heavy looking equipment that was available by the mid 1950s. That's not a problem, Chiswick was contrarily remarkably conservative in some ways considering the advances it made with bus design from the RT onwards.

The problem you have is the RM was chassis less and the body was an integral design with the strength in the body. Every change that the design underwent used standard components from the original production design, placed wherever they were required, with the exception of the midships small bay on the RML which was later used for the small bays on the FRM. Now you need a solution to transmit the power without using thicker pillars.

At the time the RM was undergoing development, Manchester was replacing its prewar trolleybuses and ordered some rather elegant bodies from Burlingham which did not look to have the thicker pillars below the electrical gear.

The cables still ran down the relevant pillars but in neat boxes which intruded slightly into the passenger space so, rather than thickening the pillar along the length of the bus, the pillar was a few inches thicker across the internal width and the seats were arranged so seat backs butted onto the intruding pillars.

With regard to badges, whatever you put on the triangle, your single wheel hubs should carry the BUT symbol. By the mid 1950s British United Traction, formed in 1946 by AEC and Leyland, produced trolleybuses ordered from fleets that would have ordered from either. The Q1s were BUT products. The standard product by 1955 was based on the AEC Regent chassis but carried BUT badges and it is certain that the running units for any Routemaster trolley would have been BUT produced.

The only quibble I'd then have about this magnificent piece of inventive modelling is the use of double rear wheels on each rear axle. Is it too late to use your spare front wheels on the trailing axle, thus representing an undriven, steerable axle?

Hello there

Yes I had thought about the electrics down the pillars. But kinda ignored it. As for the wheel arrangement...well here are some variants. The underneath is mostly paneled over, so the drive to the rear most axle could be hidden...providing a steering wheel. Or I could just go with 4 singles on the back. This would make the removal of the spats a good idea if with steering.

I'm not sure what to think really?????? Many thanks for your keen interest and input.

Anyway...look at the images and see what you think...

1. front drive and rear steer

gfoho012.jpg

2.

gfoho011.jpg

3. single wheels all round/front rear drive or is it far rear drive?

gfoho010.jpg

4.

gfoho007.jpg

5.

gfoho003.jpg

6.

gfoho004.jpg

7. Here is another possibility - just take the first wheel out and panel up. still bench seats above the area though - can't change that now.

rf87o7039-1.jpg

Edited by Model69
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It just wouldn't look right with only two axles... as a trolleybus anyway.

I suppose another alternative would be to have the single wheel in the front of the four and the drive axle at the back.

Not sure what the configuration of a trolleybus is. Is there a driveshaft from the electric motor or are there hub mounted motors (which would explain the single wheels as there would need to be room for that motor).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if you go for a 6x2 rear steer set-up. most coaches/trucks have the rear steer axle behind the drive axle, it's helps to simplyfy the propshaft layout & makes the rear end turn better,

the 2 axle variant just doesn't look right for a long bodied double decker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That thing is like a Russian doll. I never realised there was so much plastic in that kit. Defo the 3 axles. The middle axle would be driven with the rear steer if required. Would make handling easier around cities. No need for 6x4 on paved roads.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi David

You just got to keep the 6 wheeled bus !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Not so keen on the middle arch spats with a sharp point, but that is just me !!!!!!!!!!!!! Prefer a blunted centre !!!!!!!!!!

As for the steering and wheel configuration ,,,,,,,,,,, I do like the double wheel centre drive axle and single passive steer rear,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, and I do like the rear four singles !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Which is better ??????????????? Go with your heart !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Really like the RM credentials that are still there !!!!!!!!!!!!!! Does the front, nearside window get the same curvature as the RM (over the former engine bay) Would be good to mimic that curve for an additional similarity !!!!!!!!!!!

Nige

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the context of history, we established a while back that the length of your bus would exceed the 30 foot permitted by Construction and Use legislation of the time and would have had to operate under dispensation - so a two axle bus would be out as British legislation was very conservative with regard to axle loading on "exceptional" vehicles - the Glasgow 34 ft single decker being permitted with two axles only because it was lighter than a 30ft double decker.

Regarding the 3 axle layout, rear steer would be very much ahead of its time for the UK, and almost science fiction for the designers at Chiswick in the mid 1950s. If you were to go for a twin and single wheel 2nd and 3rd axles, the simplest layout from an engineering point of view is to have the rear axle steerable. Generally the range of movement is less than that of the 1st axle and many systems have the centre line of the 3rd axle wheel aligned with the space between the wheels on the 2nd axle.

In the mid 1950s, British trolley design for three axle vehicles was two have single wheels on the two rear axles. Have you enough spare front wheels to do this? If so, don't forget that the wheel centres were slightly different to those on the front wheels (look at any London trolleybus photo) and LT religiously retained and polished the nut guard rings on those wheels (as they would have done on a third, steerable axle).

Hope this helps.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello again

After much thought I have decided to stick with the configuration I already have. I think the rear steer is too futuristic for this model, like you say. Also is not the Routemaster body light enough to get away with the double drive axle weight limit? I'm just thinking that weight would not be an issue on an all together lighter bus than others it's size and length??? Also there are plenty trucks out there that have no problem turning and pulling in at that length. I've seen american trucks with long wheel bases, double rear drive and no rear steer. They also carry much more weight than a bus does.

I think that maybe my next build will stick to the single wheels and loose the Routemaster frontage. I have done so many alterations that I just don't want to commit to any more drastic changes.

Many many thanks for your advice though

David.

p.s. will be doing some more work on her this weekend

Edited by Model69
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the configuration i'm sticking with. Looking forward to doing some cleaning off and priming of panels...

Remember ...the front panel on nose will be an access panel to the inside so that the service crew can get to the electrics panel. There will be an access flap on the inside that lifts up towards the front window. There is plenty of room for the crew to get in through the blanking panel. I will have retaining locators showing on the front panel. The inside flap will be visible through the window. Much work to do there. The electric cables from the roof will run down some box tubing on the inside window supports, but not to heavy in appearance. This I will have to do from scratch also. The foot rest has been removed from the offside panel. It serves no purpose now. Fuel filler point removed too. The point between wheels at back will be blunted off a bit shorter...I think, much like the Q1...although the gap between my wheels is a little wider....so maybe that will not look so good. I'll try a few photoshop ideas with my images to see what looks best.

ryerwt056.jpg

Edited by Model69
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...