Here's a link to the latest guidance from the DVSA regarding the use of olde tyres on vehicles. Of note is the first section which deals with our questions specifically.

http://links.govdelivery.com/track?type=click&enid=ZWFzPTEmbWFpbGluZ2lkPTIwMTkwMTE0LjM1NTIxJm1lc3NhZ2VpZD1NREItUFJELUJVTC0yMDE5MDExNC4zNTUyMSZkYXRhYmFzZWlkPTEwMDEmc2VyaWFsPTE3NDI1Njk1JmVtYWlsaWQ9aW5mb0BtYXJzaG9wcGVyLmNvbSZ1c2VyaWQ9aW5mb0BtYXJzaG9wcGVyLmNvbSZmbD0mZXh0cmE9TXVsdGl2YXJpYXRlSWQ9JiYm&&&101&&&https://movingon.blog.gov.uk/2019/01/14/make-sure-you-manage-your-old-tyres/

My bus number (if any): RML2532, BEA MLL721, BEA MLL738, GS67, RT2629

There was a rather poor misinformed report about this today on BBC Breakfast. This referred to the Hindhead coach crash tyre falsely implying that it had been ON the vehicle for 19 years. However the outocome is that HMG are launching a consultation to make it illegal to have a tyre over 10 years old fitted to an HGV, PSV, minibus or taxi. At the same time the inquest has reopened into the M5 Fairfield racing car transporter crash which killed 5 people when a front tyre blew out. The outcome is pretty obvious.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-to-consult-on-ban-on-10-year-old-tyres-to-boost-road-safety

I understand the Historic Vehicles Clubs are making strong representations as is the CPT for operators of heritage buses on class 6 tickets. In my view the previous view of a tyre management risk assessment ought to suffice. Considering how few heritage PSVs there are around they're not a huge risk due to the low mileage and relatively low speeds.

I'd also suggest with other matters occupying government time tyre safety is likely to be low on their list of priorities.

My bus number (if any): RML2532

The Horsebox that caused the M5 crash had a front tyre 18 years old " whose poor condition would not have been obvious"....

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-bristol-47403571

My bus number (if any): RTL 960, RMC 1458, RM 1585 and several RTs

Most horse boxes that ae presented for annual test are in "poor condition" and anecdotally have a higher failure rate than the dreaded "white vans" when they are 3 years old!

Almost every horse box I've seen at a test station has failed on more than one item. The owner, usually a horsey type lady with jodhpurs, when told it has failed says "eau, aisle tell mai mechanic to attend to it". to which the usual reply from the VOSA man is "well madam, he ought to have done so for the last five years or more".

My bus number (if any): RML2532

The latest on this matter is in the current edition of RouteOne (19th June 2019) which says that the proposed ban on the use of tyres over 10 years old will not apply to heritage vehicles. Thanks to James Fairchild and the FBHVC for their input on this.

That leaves another unresolved matter, there is no legal definition of a heritage vehicle!

My bus number (if any): RML2532

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/older-tyre-ban-in-bid-to-improve-road-safety

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/banning-tyres-aged-10-years-and-older

No exemptions proposed for any "operating" buses or coaches, nor vehicles in private, non PSV, use that aren't yet 40 years old. See option 2 (preferred option) in the impact assessment.

My bus number (if any): Nothing beginning with RM...

The wording says "heritage vehicles". there is currently no definition of heritag vehicles.

If anyone cares to make a comment to the government's impact study survey, please do so before the due date.

The fact there's been 2 terrible accidents caused by old tyres is the typical knee-jerk reaction i've come to expect from the governments of this country. One accident on one bus, one accident on one horse box and we all have to suffer the expense of throwing away perfectly good tyres just because they're 10 years old. the risk assessment study didn't even look at things like cross-ply tyres.

It annoys me that they seem to indicate historic buses will be exempt, but if they're used "in service" they're not. surely a bus carrying passengers is a bus carrying passengers regardless of whether they pay to travel or not. This argument has been used in the minibus safety debate many times. Should all minibus drivers have to have a PSV icence? Same argument. That money changes hands to enable travel doesn't make any difference as to whether a tyre will blow out and kill somebody.

My bus number (if any): RML2532

This is brings in the question of MOT exempt buses over forty years old as the tyre age would never be checked officially apart from a roadside VOSA check or (God forbid) a serious incident ?. So if these vehicles were included in the tyre age rule it would rely on the vehicle owner discarding their tyres at ten years old regardless of serviceability?
Associated with this question as many vehicles on running days are now no longer MOT’d but are still carrying the General Public (who are probably unaware of this) you are relying on the owner being responsible and knowledgable enough to maintain the vehicle to a roadworthy and safe condition (as most do I assume as no one wants to have to be recovered from the roadside). I know of at least one Museum that still insists that all vehicles running on their behalf still pass a class five MOT regardless of age. As has been mentioned before on this forum it would only take one unfortunate accident involving an MOT exempt bus carrying the General Public for the knee jerk reaction that Roy mentions to put an end to these enjoyable days, which are at best a bit of a grey area considering the regular checks and maintenance standards required by normal PSV’s in every day use ?

My bus number (if any): RML2747

Therein lies the problem. The proposal seem to be that "heritage buses" used "commercially" will have to have tyres less than 10 years old. These would all be to class 6 spec, run on an operators Licence and subject to routine safety checks. Ok, these could be out every day of the week, but on that basis the tyres won't last 10 years.

Those run on a class 5 or exempt ticket can equally be used on free bus services with a full oad of passengers most weekends of the year and never have a safety check.

My fleet of buses run on an O licence and are regularly checked and written records kept as per the O licence conditions. We also have a written tyre age and inspection policy to satisfy the current DVSA guidance notes.

My bus number (if any): RML2532

Roy,

I would suggest that you participate in the consultation making exactly those points. The Consultation report on MOTs listed the different reply arguments. While 'they' have already decided what happens the arguments will still be recorded.

Yes I will, i've already emailed the FBHCVC with my points of view. It would help if others on this forum could do likewise as it will affect all of us in one way or another and it's another knee-jerk reaction to a problem that isn't really there. Wit a reported 0.06% of PSVs noted with out-of-date tyres on 23,000 tests is about 38 tyres. the PSV fleet of the whole of the UK is about 98,000 buses and coaches; of those 260 are pre-1960 psv's and will not be seen by the ministry anyway. It is unlikely the class 5 fleet will not be recorded on the tyre age failures as they will be exempt from the tyre age limit.

It is a sledgehammer to crack a nut. the problem is virtually non-existent. that is why they dropped the smoke test from the annual test, so few vehicles failed it was not worth doing.

My bus number (if any): RML2532

Interesting about the reason for dropping the smoke test. When Gillingham test station was in business I found great difficulty in getting AECs to pass on their all singing, all dancing smoke meter; it required a bit of clandestine cooperation about how far down to press the pedal.

It was the "wrong sort of smoke" roy! :)

My bus number (if any): RML2532

The government has issued a consultation on 10 year old tyres. Responses are invited from interested parties using this on line form.

https://www.smartsurvey.co.uk/s/older-tyres/

It would seem that lobbying from vintage vehicle clubs appears to have been heard. Buses which exempt from MOT and not in commercial use will be exempt from the requirements.

From a safety point of view I can see absolutely no difference whatsoever between a bus which is carrying 'fare paying passengers' and one which is carrying passengers who have not paid a fare.

I consider the argument that old vehicles cannot attain a speed which would be dangerous if a tyre should fail to be disingenuous considering the quite frequently heard discussions, within the preserved vehicle community, about modifying a vehicle to make it go faster.

I agree Roy as you see some atrocious tyres at rallies etc with visible cracking on the side walls - it would be better to have a voluntary code that tyres are removed from rims when they get to a minimum of ten years old to have the integrity of their construction checked if tubeless and also the tubes and flaps for rough surfaces etc if on split rims - but with no Mot required on many vehicles how could that be enforced ? Vehicles can often sit about for years on a set of tyres then change hands and suddenly start carrying full loads of passengers on running days.

My bus number (if any): RML 2747

"full loads of passengers on running days ...."

Careful, I think you may open a whole new can of worms .....


Andrew

My bus number (if any): RM1368

Especially on vehicles newly restored that have been off the road for a while .......

My bus number (if any): RML 2747

Quite true, No need for MOT, no need for PMIs, no need for recording working hours, no need to actually know the proposed route which quite often requires using width limited roads with no knowledge of whether permission has been granted. No need for any actual experience other than having the correct valid licence and medical.You even see vehicles carrying the spare wheel inside the bus. Plenty of obsolete tickets issued as souvenirs, but frequently poor observation of the platform and too much distraction by another old bus seen. Vehicle stops outside a pretty pub or the site of a demolished former bus garage and swarms of photographers decamp and stand in the middle of the road to get a 'piccy'.

Not just enthusiasts on board but joe public and his young family carried who are totally oblivious to all this.

The organisers are to be congratulated for their hard work because they try very hard indeed and the families love the idea, but the participants do need to be so much more professional about it.

Exactly Roy that’s the worry - one unfortunate incident somewhere in the country could cause a knee jerk reaction by the powers that be that could put an end to the enjoyment for hundreds of people as at best it's a very grey area legally ?

My bus number (if any): RML 2747

Which then leads us on to the whole question of why the UK appears to be the only country in Europe that lets people without a D qualification drive a bus around fully loaded providing it is not for money. In most other countries there's also no difference between a class 5 and class 6 bus But that is a separate discussion outside this heading. A bus is a bus. They can all carry a lot of people. They all have to meet the same standards. Some countries have the testing exemption we enjoy for all vehicles over a certain age. But drivers must have a class D entitlement and buses have to be up to standard.

My bus number (if any): RML2532